Good night and good luck and watch your metadata
That is it for the sitting fortnight. With that bill now passed – that’s a pretty big it as well.
Thank you all very much for your company over the past couple of weeks and thanks, as always, to Mike Bowers, for stellar visuals from dawn til dusk.
Today, Thursday:
- We got new service chiefs. The man who stopped the boats – Angus Campbell – will now run the army.
- The senate said hello to Katy Gallagher, who takes her spot for Labor in the ACT – and goodbye to Liberal Brett Mason.
- The senate also gave us a mandatory data retention scheme despite profound objections from the Greens and most of the crossbench – and journalist Peter Greste – who criticised the globalised McCarthyism of the war on terror, and its redrawing of the boundaries between the state and the citizen. The Greens promised to make Labor accountable with progressive voters for this particular burst of bipartisanship.
That’s Thursday. We’ll see you for the budget session, if not before.
Updated
Mandatory metadata collections clears the senate
We can’t take a picture because of the ridiculous restrictions in the senate on photography. So the bricks are out.
The nays don’t have it.
Voting in favour: the Coalition; Labor; PUP senator Dio Wang.
Against: Greens; David Leyonhjelm; Jacqui Lambie; Glenn Lazarus; John Madigan; Nick Xenophon; Ricky Muir.
The bill has been resolved in the affirmative.
Here is the vote.
LDP sentaor David Leyonhjelm says to George Brandis, that with the greatest of respect, he doesn’t believe him on his various assurances.
Lawyers have money but police have guns.
I condemn this bill.
Nick Xenophon makes his final contribution. My great fear, based on the text of this bill ... this legislation, like a python, will further put the squeeze on investigative journalism.
Bad for democracy, is his conclusion.
Labor senator Jacinta Collins rises to rebut.
Mandatory data retention is not mass surveillance. Information that is recorded is not necessarily accessed. We have built a system with strong checks and balances.
The Labor party has not caved in on this matter. We accept that we will be judged, as will yourselves, as will everyone in the political arena.
Scott Ludlam:
Our work now turns to documenting this scheme and campaigning for its repeal.
Ludlam references the communications minister Malcolm Turnbull’s recent advice about how to avoid capture by the mandatory data retention scheme. Some of this advice, he says, is valid – but it doesn’t take into account intelligence gathering by our major intelligence partners. People who want to blow the whistle need to know what they are doing in a technical sense, and proceed with absolute caution.
Green senator Scott Ludlam rises to blast the outcome. This legislation entrenches a system of passive surveillance, he says. The Abbott government has failed the test of balancing security with liberty.
The ALP has caved in to Tony Abbott’s fear campaign.
You failed to turn up and you will be judged for it – and in 2016 you will answer for it.
In closing out the third reading, the attorney-general George Brandis, thanks the senate for a robust process in committee.
I think for what has been a difficult issue, I think we have had a very civil and intelligent debate.
Here it comes ...
We are still on this 35P amendment. Green senator Scott Ludlam says Labor has a chance to do something with its buyers regret about criminalising the publication of some national security matters. Labor has expressed belated concern about some of the implications of 35P. But Labor won’t be supporting this amendment.
I need to remind readers that we won’t be able to record this final division pictorially. We are not permitted to do that in this chamber. The senators like their privacy to be protected. Ah, the ironies.
Lets be realistic senator Xenophon, Asio is a covert intelligence gathering body. That’s what it does.
George Brandis. Helping Nick Xenophon out here.
In this final amendment, Nick Xenophon is trying to reprosecute 35P. The government’s first tranche of counter terrorism legislation made it an offence to report on special intelligence operations. Xenophon is using the opportunity of this bill to try and make 35P a more tolerable provision. He won’t succeed of course.
This is the final amendment, cross bencher Nick Xenophon has just advised the senate. A vote is coming in a little while. We’ll stay live to record the outcome, even though we know how the story ends.
Metadata is back on, presumably for its conclusive phase – which could be short, or long, depending on the whims of the chamber.
We’ll take this as a comment.
Fantastic valedictory speech by Sen. Brett Mason. His wit, intellect and friendship will be missed by all in the Senate.
— Cory Bernardi (@corybernardi) March 26, 2015
It was a good speech. No-one could accuse Mason of failing to wear his heart on his sleeve.
Mason is recalling the vague indignity of having to tell the veteran National powerbroker Ron Boswell that he’d been re-elected in the 2010 election on Sex Party preferences. Boswell advised him to first ring and tell his mother that he had been successfully re-elected as a senator for Queensland – then go to church and beg for forgiveness. Mason wraps up by saying politics has been the great honour of his life, an experience that will never be exceeded.
Mason says Peter Costello once told him: It’s a sad truth Brett but there are too many lonely people in parliament.
I’ve never found parliament lonely. I’ve been sustained by Liberal colleagues.
He says he has a note in front of him – for God’s sake don’t forget the Nats. The Liberal and National parties are one party in Queensland, but Mason is a Liberal, not a National. He goes out a Liberal not a National, a tory from Teneriffe. (My colleagues tell me Teneriffe is a trendy inner city suburb in BrisVegas.)
Mason also pays tribute to Labor and the Greens. Not one uncivil word has ever been said to him outside the chamber, which he thinks is remarkable given many provocations on his part.
Staff, I’ve had a few, they’ve been great, Brett Mason says. Former staff include the current member for Moncrieff, Steve Ciobo – parliamentary secretary to the minister for foreign affairs, parliamentary secretary to the minister for trade and investment ...
Who stole my portfolio.
He was always a very cunning employee.
(Much chortling.)
I sometimes think I’ve been kissed by a rainbow.
That’s the opening sortie of Liberal senator Brett Mason’s valedictory speech, underway now. Strap in folks.
The chamber is dividing on amendments posed by PUP senator Dio Wang. If the chamber is on time (remember all things liable to change without notice), Mason’s valedictory should be next.
The senate has moved back to consideration of the metadata bill. It’s still not clear whether the government will have a go at recommitting the vote which has allowed a fresh inquiry into conditions on Nauru, post the Moss report.
Faith in civility
I mentioned this in February, at the time he made this speech. But I never got a chance to do a proper post. Thinking as we were in the last post about Brett Mason, who departs the senate this afternoon – the Liberal gave a very gracious chamber speech marking the retirement of Labor’s John Faulkner.
It’s one of those speeches which restores faith in civility. Here’s a segment.
I liked John most of all because at a difficult time in politics he helped me. I remember, at a memorial service for the victims of the Bali bombings, he sat next to me and said, ‘I hear you’re having a tough time.’ From memory, I agreed with that proposition. He said: ‘Just remember, in this game you need some scar tissue—otherwise, the first punch will knock you out. It’s painful, comrade, but it will do you good in the long run, trust me.’ Of course he was right and, over the next 12 to 18 months, while resolving various political issues, John’s advice would often resonate and echo in my mind. He would stop me now and then and ask how I was going.
He provided the great solace—the great solace—of perspective. He was also a model of discretion. I knew he would never betray a confidence. You could make an arrangement with him and he would never break the deal. He was not tricky or devious and, just like you want government to be, he was always open and transparent.
John Faulkner was also great company. He was very well read but never showed off. He was nearly always the smartest person in the room but he had the great confidence not to need to prove that to everyone in the room. He knew more about Labor history, and indeed the broader political history of Australia, than nearly anyone in parliament.
While many people will remember John’s political speeches, perhaps it is no coincidence that the ones I remember best are the ones about our shared passion, cricket. His speeches on the deaths of Sir Donald Bradman, Gary ‘Gus’ Gilmour and recently, of course, Phil Hughes were eloquent tributes not only to the great game of cricket but to these remarkable men who excelled at it. There were also some more curious contributions, such as John’s obsession with the Glebe post office, which he went on and on about. But who will ever forget his moving motion of condolence on the death of Gough Whitlam?
This will sound like a strange thing to say but, despite his significance as a Labor leader and parliamentary performer, I always felt in the back of my mind that John was a bit shy—that he would be more comfortable curled up with a biography of one of his great heroes, John Curtin or Ben Chifley or Gough Whitlam, than debating budget bills in the Australian Senate. Perhaps when you appreciate that, before he worked in politics, John was a specialist teacher of children with severe disabilities, it makes sense that he never lusted after the limelight.
When I first had the privilege of serving in this place, I thought of John Faulkner as a class warrior.
I was wrong: he was a warrior with class. The Senate is a poorer place for his leaving, and I miss him.
This is very true. In addition to the resoution of metadata, and the vexed issue of whether or not the government tries to recommit the vote on the inquiry into Nauru, the Senate will also farewell Queensland Liberal Brett Mason this afternoon.
Today, we farewell my colleague and friend @SenBrettMason from the Senate. I wish Brett the very best of success! pic.twitter.com/OD2Fretwt8
— Dean Smith (@DeanSmithWA) March 26, 2015
Updated
This is a different sort of serious matter.
Madam Speaker has just farewelled one of the clerks in the House of Representatives.
Now she moves to the matter of the Liberal MP Andrew Laming. That sounds terribly portentous – but it actually isn’t. Madam Speaker has examined whether Laming was in contempt of the parliament yesterday when he:
- Orchestrated a stunt in the federation chamber where he spilled bunker oil on the furniture.
- Apologised.
- Was booted out for 24 hours for being disorderly.
- Issued a statement effectively recanting his apology.
Madam Speaker doesn’t approve, but Laming is not in contempt.
The government has powered through Shorten’s procedural jaunt – and the prime minister has placed further questions on the notice paper.
The Senate is currently discussing ‘who is the biggest cold war warrior’. Yes. It is.
Updated
While the doors are locked and the votes counted. Some chamber shots.
Presumably this is the GST/Grants Commission story?
Journalist Peter Greste is watching on from the visitors gallery.
Updated
The justice minister has added ice to the death cult and metadata Dorothy Dixer mix.
Bill Shorten evidently wants a more expeditious end to the last question time before the budget. He’s attempting to condemn the prime minister for leading a chaotic and incompetent government.
Manager of government business Christopher Pyne isn’t in the mood. He’s moved a gag motion. Ring the bells.
Bill Shorten:
Q: I refer to reports that robocalls featuring the dulcet tones of the minister for communications have been heard by voters picking up their phones in NSW. Prime minister, why do NSW Liberals prefer a recorded Malcolm Turnbull to a real prime minister?
Madam Speaker rules that question out of order.
On radio this morning, Mike Baird was asked why Turnbull was featuring in the Liberal party’s reach out effort in NSW – not Tony Abbott.
Mike Baird:
Malcolm is very well known.
Q: Tony Abbott isn’t?
Updated
For a moment I thought the immigration minister Peter Dutton called boat people terrorists. It’s ok, it was just me.
Peter Dutton:
We will keep our borders strong, for a couple of reasons, Madam Speaker, not just because we want to stop the boats, not just because we want to stop people drowning at sea, and not just because we don’t want our detention centres filled with children as they were under Labor – but also because we want to stare down the scourge of terrorism and we want to stare down – we want to stare down those people who would seek to import methamphetamine, ice and drugs into our country.
Bill Shorten wants to know why the treasurer said last week that there was nothing for NSW to worry about in the Grants Commission report – when the AFR reports this morning the recommendations will take $200m from Mike Baird?
I mentioned this GST story earlier today.
Abbott’s response is you can’t trust Bill Shorten.
The Dorothy Dixers are death cult and metadata.
The prime minister a moment ago.
Madam Speaker, some 230 people have been off-loaded from planes that were bound for the Middle East. I have a very simple message to people who might be tempted to travel to the Middle East to join terrorist organisations – don’t do it.
Foreign minister Julie Bishop.
Well over 100 passports of would-be fighters have now been cancelled and I have suspended around 10 of these passports. Madam Speaker, all too often I am approving passport cancellations or suspensions for a string of 16 or 17-year-olds seeking to travel, always with ludicrously large amounts of cash, bogus stories of holidays, and frequently without their family’s knowledge.
In recent days I have implemented emergency suspensions as the young person concerned is actually at the airport about to depart.
I want to thank our border control agencies for the outstanding job that they are doing in cooperation with our security agencies, our intelligence agencies, and our law enforcement agencies.
Bill Shorten.
Q: Prime minister, it’s happened again - last week in the prime minister’s courtyard somebody said, and I quote, “A ratio of debt to GDP at about 50 or 60% is a pretty good result.” Given that this happened in the prime minister’s very own courtyard, does the prime minister have any idea who said this?
(This question relates to events yesterday, when the prime minister attempted to disown part of his recent reposition on the budget.)
The prime minister remains artfully non-specific about who might have said what is quoted in the question. Abbott remembers other bits of what he said.
Madam Speaker, I said it’s a lot better than 120% – which is where the former government was taking us.
Everyone is roaring their heads off already. It is certainly Thursday.
Question time
Good God. It’s 2pm.
Question time today opens with the prime minister outlining events for Anzac Day.
Madam Speaker, this Anzac Day, I have invited the leader of the opposition to join me at the commemoration at Gallipoli, and at home I know that all members will be participating in local commemorations right around the country. When parliament resumes, Madam Speaker, a motion will be put before the house recognising this historic occasion. There will be subsequent debate here so that members can report for the record on the activities that took place in their own electorates.
The hansard of of the debate will then be given to the Australian War Memorial so that Australians will always know how we commemorated this centenary. Madam Speaker, I do look forward to reporting back to the House on our commemorations when the House resumes in May.
Looky here .. the sequel
The senate has voted in favour of another inquiry into conditions on Nauru in the wake of the damning allegations about activities in detention centres contained in the Moss report. The vote was 31 ayes, 29 no’s.
Ricky Muir, John Madigan and David Leyonhjelm voted with the government to supress the inquiry. But there is an argument about whether the Family First senator Bob Day, who is currently away, was paired for this vote.
Red room rumour has it that the government will try and recommit the vote in order to knock off this inquiry some time this afternoon.
We’ll keep you posted.
Watch this space.
Looky here ..
While Peter Greste was talking, the government found another hollow log. The attorney-general George Brandis has just located a spare $25.5m for legal aid, community legal services and indigenous legal services. This was money that had been cut from the same services.
Never leave your desk. It could be on ebay in your absence.
We hired the government, they work for us, not the other way around
Metadata, again. It’s a question of cultural values as well as accountability. Australian values champion a fair go, an open society.
I’ve spoken to a number of experts who seemed pretty convinced that there are ways of managing both the security issues in a way that doesn’t necessarily impinge on the journalists’ capacity to investigate the government, to hold the government to account, and it certainly doesn’t close down the space for people like whistleblowers to operate.
If we do that, then I think we lose something fundamentally important to our society. And we need to bear that in mind, and this is something, as I said, that I believe has helped make Australia what it is today.
On restricting journalists access to detention centres.
Greste:
I am concerned about the lack of access. We need to have access, we need to see what’s going on, and as difficult as it is for the government, if we close that down, if we make it hard for journalists to do their jobs, then we end up with dark spaces where things happen that really shouldn’t be happening.
The public has a right to know, it’s as simple as that. We hired the government, they work for us, not the other way around.
Greste is critical of local coverage of foreign issues.
I am quite disturbed by the lack of coverage of world affairs in the Australian press. I don’t think we really pay sufficient attention to the rest of the planet and what’s going on around us.
I know that this is largely because editors and the pollsters, the marketing guys have said that the Australians aren’t that interested in international news, that they’re much more interested in what’s taking place in their neighbourhood than what is going on overseas.
But this is one of those moments where the media as a whole needs to take a principled position and say as a nation we need to understand, if we don’t drive this forward, if we don’t push out those stories, if we don’t make people aware of what’s going on, then people won’t take an interest in it.
So we have a responsibility to place international news, foreign news higher up the agenda than we do.
Do we want to head towards more authoritarianism or head towards more accountability?
Greste, on the Abbott government’s metadata bill.
Obviously there’s been a lot of discussion and debate about the metadata legislation and I haven’t been in the country long enough to really get involved at a personal level.
I would like to take a closer look and see what we can do with that, but I think that we need to, as I said, hold to those principles and have a bigger debate about what the relationship should be between the press and the government.
Which way do we want to go with this? Do we want to head towards more authoritarianism or head towards more accountability? That’s the way the slider works. It seems to me to be quite binary and we need to be conscious of that dilemma.
That’s the discussion that the nation needs to have.
Updated
Q: Does free speech include that right to antagonise and provoke?
This question relates to the killings of staff at Charlie Hebdo.
Greste:
This is not a playground, you know. Just because someone says that your religion is a nasty religion doesn’t mean that we should get so offended that we lash out violently. We’ve got to have these grown-up debates and discussions.
I think we have to be very mindful of how we conduct these debates in public and whether or not ‘Charlie Hebdo’ crossed that line, I think, is another separate debate, but ... whether we should be legislating to limit that ... I don’t think we should.
I think we need to be grown up enough, sufficiently grown up and mature enough to be able to have these kinds of arguments – to risk offending others without descending into the kind of violence that we saw.
In closing, Greste floats a new global treaty to defend press freedom. He references a discussion I was part of last night on the relative merits of this as a proposal. (I was in the yes camp. I should declare that interest.)
Greste:
I know that there is quite a deal of cynicism about this and last into night we had a rather vigorous discussion about whether this was the right approach or not. The debate is still open, but it is a debate we need to have and I think it is an idea that really has the potential to some have influence.
Because this is important. We expect it will be controversial, but it seems clear that something has to be done to tackle the assaults on media freedom in general, and the hundreds of journalists being killed, imprisoned, tortured, intimidated all over the world.
He says it is all too tempting in the current environment to drag the slider to the right ... to claim more power in interests of national security, trading off the media’s oversight role in the process.
Even if we wanted to live in a police state, history suggests that we can never really truly deal with terrorism.
And the perversely, the best way to tackle extremism of any sort is to keep an open, accountable society with a free media, able to do its job, interrogating not just governments, but those whose opinions tend to drift off into the political extremes.
It almost feels like a kind of globalised McCarthyism
Greste says the war of terror has redefined boundaries in a way that threatens the basic principles of a free press. The media, he says, is the new battleground.
Since the war on terror began, governments across the globe have used the T-word as an excuse to, for all sorts of attacks on human rights and press freedoms. It almost feels like a kind of globalised McCarthyism where simply invoking terrorism is enough to get away in some cases – literally – to get away with murder.
If you cross the lines in pursuit of our most fundamental principles of balance, of accuracy, of fairness – you effectively join the enemy.
In effect, what it has done is make the media the battleground.
Greste:
Right now the very idea of a free press is under attack from groups who take the heads off journalists, to individuals who would shoot up a magazine office in Paris or a free speech conference in Denmark, to governments trying to limit the scope of our work with draconian legislation.
What you did (by uniting behind our cause) was serve notice on anyone who would attack those most fundamental principles – that we are united.
You made it clear that these are things we are prepared to fight for as one, and whatever happens from here, we must not lose that singular voice.
Greste has worked through an extensive list of thank you’s – to family, the lawyers, to diplomats and politicians. But he’s moving now to his organising principle. Today is about press freedom and about solidarity within the profession.
There is one more thank-you that has to be made and that is to us. And by that I don’t mean we three, the Al Jazeera journalists in prison in Egypt, I mean the collective us.
Because if there was one other truly remarkable thing that emerged out of this battle, it was the unprecedented sense of unity amongst the wider journalism community.
Now, as everyone in this room well knows and as we’ve just heard, we journalists are a cranky, cantankerous light. We’re almost impossible to organise, we are by nature argumentative and we would much rather compete than cooperate – and I dare say the only time that any of us move in the same direction is when there is a bar in the room.
As everyone here well knows, throughout our detention, the media somehow abandoned the habits and the instincts of a lifetime to line up behind us in an extraordinarily way.
I would be willing to bet that journalists have never united around a single common cause in the way that they did ours.
Press club address @PeterGreste with @Julie BishopMP @GuardianAus @murpharoo #politicslive http://t.co/trFHZOUgix pic.twitter.com/uYgG3r7xZ7
— Mike Bowers (@mpbowers) March 26, 2015
In the process of thank you’s, two Greste zingers, one about Nick Xenophon, and another about the foreign minister Julie Bishop.
On Xenophon:
A lot of political leaders volunteered to make representations on the family’s behalf or who spoke in parliament or contacted us or simply to offer their support, and even in the case of Nick Xenophon, volunteered to go to Egypt as an envoy – although I suspect there are more than a few Coalition politicians who would be thinking more along the lines of a prisoner exchange.
On Bishop:
One person, again I can’t say who, commented on your uncanny ability to smile very warmly at a particular diplomat and at the same time burn holes through the back of their skulls, giving them the distinct impression that they’ve just been hugged by the Terminator.
Peter Greste addresses the NPC
Peter Greste opens his address thus.
It really is to see how extraordinary life can spin on a coin. On December 28th, 2013 I was still a relatively unknown correspondent, trying to make sense of Africa, and now, there is a knock on the door, Egyptian police barge in, and through a truly bizarre set of circumstances, I’m here. It just goes to show that you really can’t take anything for granted.
Super quick lunch time summary
Later than I intended, let’s take stock.
- Angus Campell famously ‘stopped the boats’ for the Abbott government as chief of Operation Sovereign Borders – now he will run the army. Campbell’s been appointed chief of army and Air Vice Marshall Gavin Davis AO will take up a new role as chief of air force from July.
- The metadata debate continues, thus far without resolution.
- Labor has a new ACT senator. Katy Gallagher took her place in the red room today. And Australia has a new MOU with Cambodia on migration matters.
Greste next. Let’s keep jogging.
I had the great privilege of having dinner with Peter Greste last night. Greste is the Al Jazeera foreign correspondent who spent 400 days in Tora prison in Cairo. He’s intent on using his public profile to advance the cause of press freedom – which is more than timely given today’s senate debate. Greste is coming up shortly at the National Press Club. I look forward to covering that live in just a little bit.
Updated
In the senate, the metadata debate continues on. Nick Xenophon is proposing amendments regarding the treatment of journalists and sources under the new regime. There is discussion about the role of the new Public Interest Advocate. Xenophon is concerned that the new PIA’s could be flying blind in proceedings for warrants. He’s not sure how this new system will work.
The PIA’s have been badged in this whole debate as defenders of journalists in instances when police seeks warrants for their metadata. This isn’t quite accurate. The PIA’s are in the regime to safeguard the public interest – a task that may or may not align specifically with the obligations of journalists to protect their sources. The attorney-general has told Xenophon that he doesn’t think the PIA should be a contradictor in the system – a sentiment that doesn’t exactly seem to reassure Xenophon.
In any case, the senate is beaking from metadata now to deal with other business. It will be back on later this afternoon.
Again, this particular event fell within my technology black hole. Here is the signing of the MOU with Cambodia on migration matters.
We did expect debate in the senate today on a private members bill on legalising gay marriage, brought on by Liberal Democrat senator David Leyonhjelm. But Leyonhjelm pulled the bill. He pulled the bill because the Coalition partyroom this week did not discuss how to proceed on this issue. Legalising same sex marriage has no prospect of success unless Tony Abbott gives his MPs a conscience vote. Even then, it’s not clear how a vote would go.
“There’s not a lot of point kicking off the debate if the Liberals haven’t changed,” Leyonhjelm told Sky News earlier on today. One prominent Liberal has, however, added his voice to the call for a conscience vote. “We haven’t had that debate in the party room, and my strong view is that we should have a conscience vote,” Josh Frydenberg told ABC radio. “If we are [granted a free vote], then a lot of people will probably express a view in favour of gay marriage.” My colleague Shalailah Medhora has a news wrap here.
The prime minister explaining the dynamics of firefighting at the press conference just before has prompted me to seek wisdom from the office fortune cookie box. Readers who have been with Mike and I all week will know that we have decided to follow the lead of the education minister Christopher Pyne – who last week was moved to consult a fortune cookie concerning the ultimate fate of his university reforms. Seeking wisdom in fortune cookies seems as accurate as any other process of inquiry undertaken routinely in this building. What could the prime minister’s firefighting metaphor mean?
Chris Crackers provided the following randomised insight.
Speaking of the red room.
I’m not sure whether you’re an aficionado of Alice in Wonderland but, senator, you have just fallen down the rabbit hole.
This is the attorney-general George Brandis, to Green senator Scott Ludlam. In the metadata debate, which is ongoing, Brandis chastises Ludlam for suggesting metadata is content. He then goes on to explain that the word metadata isn’t in this bill, because it is jargon, not a term of art. Which rather begs the question who is down which rabbit hole, for me at least.
Speaking of ladies – my technology troubles hit just as the new ACT Labor senator Katy Gallagher took her place in the red room. I mentioned this development, but was unable to share pictures. So here we go now.
Hai George.
Hai Penny.
Holding the bags. Our view from down the back.
So while at the moment the service chiefs are all male, I dare say the time is coming when that might be different.
That was Tony Abbott remarking just before on when women might rise to high ranks in the ADF.
Just a lovely visual counterpoint from Mike Bowers. Here’s how things looked at the front of the press conference.
And here are the ladies, holding the bags, down the back.
Updated
@murpharoo Maybe it's like when you call an IT helpdesk? Suddenly your computer starts working, even before they've done anything.
— Matt Liddy (@mattliddy) March 25, 2015
Life is a box of chocolates
This wins. Hands down.
Q: You used to talk about a debt and deficit disaster before the last election. Can you just clarify what you were talking about - were you talking about the 40-year projections – and do you regret that rhetoric now?
Tony Abbott.
Well, let me start at the beginning, Mark. As some of you know, I’ve been a reasonably long serving member of the Davidson rural fire brigade. And you can have a terrible fire which is threatening homes, threatening communities, that is an emergency. The instant the fire brigade turns up, the emergency starts to ease.
(Let’s think this through as a matter of logic. Does a fire start to ease when the firepersons turn up, or do they have to do something first. Like, I don’t know, dousing the flames?)
The GST story now that I flagged earlier on this morning.
Q: Do you support changing the methodology so that WA gets a fairer deal because of the softening of the iron ore price?
Tony Abbott will have to get back to us on that one:
Well, obviously there is a Commonwealth Grants Commission process which deals with this and no doubt this is a matter that will in the fullness of time be dealt with by the Commonwealth Grants Commission. Once the caretaker period is over in NSW, no doubt this report will be dealt with.
Q: When you hand down the budget in May, will the forward projections contain still the savings from the measures you’ve been unable to pass?
Tony Abbott:
The forward projections will be based on the measures in this year’s budget. And obviously what will be doing as part of this year’s budget is dealing with measures that have been left over from last year’s budget.
What you will see in this year’s budget is a whole series of measures that are responsible, measured and fair and which continue the task of budget repair that this government has had to undertake because of the debt and deficit disaster that we inherited from Labor.
As you saw in the MYEFO document, every year we make steady progress towards a much better budget outcome. Every year, we improve the budget bottom line by about $10bn – and I think it’s that kind of steady progress towards a much better outcome which the Australian people expect from us.
The defence folks have been shooed off. Back to the boats question now.
Tony Abbott:
Mark your question. Look, we don’t comment on operational matters. We haven’t commented on operational matters on the water from the very beginning of Operation Sovereign Borders and I don’t intend to break that rule now.
Mark Riley from the Seven Network persists.
Q: Can you at least say whether the new Indonesian government is comfortable with the policies?
Frankly, one of the great things about the end of the – or the effective end of the large-scale people smuggling we saw under the former government here in Australia is that it’s removed an irritant in the Australia-Indonesia relationship.
It was a distraction. It was an irritant. Now it’s largely gone. That’s a very good thing for both our countries.
(Largely gone.)
Q: I have a question for Air Marshal Davis. Is that possible?
Tony Abbott:
The protocol I understand is that prime ministers, ministers and CDF speak at these events. The distinguished appointees will no doubt talk to you on another occasion.
(A wag like this blogger might then ask – why are the others there if they can’t respond to questions?)
There was a question on Syria along the lines of the question he got yesterday. Abbott says there’s no plans to expand operations into Syria, but Australia is supporting operations in Syria.
Are you sure the boats have stopped?
Q: A question on Operation Sovereign Borders. Lieutenant General Campbell may or may not be able to help. Can you confirm reports in Jakarta an asylum boat has been turned back in recent days, with twelve people on board? Was that done in compliance with the new Indonesian government, and does it show people smugglers are trying to restart their trade?
Tony Abbott says not now.
I will take that question but I think we might deal with questions that are about the specific announcement today and then I might ask the military to withdraw and then I will deal with that question.
"I dare say the time is coming when that might be different"
Q: You mentioned General Morrison had done a lot in driving change in the army particularly. Does that remain a priority for the government and does it remain a priority for Lieutenant General Campbell?
Tony Abbott:
Of course it’s a priority for the government and for all of the service chiefs as you’d expect. I am incredibly proud of our armed forces. I think we are all very proud of our armed forces. We want our armed forces to reflect us at our best.
Of course, members of the armed forces are only human and, from time to time, even the very best people will sometimes make mistakes. The important thing is that we have the best possible culture, we have the best possible structures and we have the best possible support for everyone who is trying to do the right thing.
Q: With no disrespect to the men you have appointed today, I can’t help but notice there are no women there. When do you think we might have women in such high ranks of the defence force?
Tony Abbott:
That’s steadily happening. You may or may not have been at the parade for the people who have served in Afghanistan over the last decade or so and that parade was led by a distinguished veteran of Afghanistan, Major General Wilkie who, of course, is female.
Increasingly, right through the ranks of our armed forces, we have women serving and they are serving in an ever-greater range of roles.
So while at the moment the service chiefs are all male, I dare say the time is coming when that might be different.
Q: The Americans announced the coalition is taking part in air strikes around Tikrit. I assume this means Australian aircraft are taking part in strikes around Tikrit. Does this mean Australia is working hand-in-hand with Shia militias?
Tony Abbott:
We are working hand-in-hand with the Iraqi government. That’s what we set out to do when we committed our air component to the coalition campaign. We set out to work hand-in-hand with the Iraqi government to do what we could to help the Iraqi Government to regain control of its own country and to disrupt, degrade and ultimately destroy the ISIL or Daesh death cut which is reaching out, even here, in Australia.
We are doing what we’ve always done. We are working constructively and effectively with the Iraqi government.
First question to Abbott. Who stops the boats now?
Q: What happens with Operation Sovereign Borders? Will you appoint a new military chief or move to the civilian field?
Tony Abbott:
We will have more to say early next week on that subject.
A modern soldier's soldier
Abbott pays tribute to the outgoing head of army.
I should say a few words about General David Morrison who has been a ground-breaking, path-finding Chief of Army. He is a soldier’s soldier. But he’s also been a modern soldier’s soldier who has very much wanted the Army to move into the modern world.
No-one who saw his famous talk to the Defence Forces, “The standard you walk past is the standard you accept” will ever doubt his commitment to making our Army a modern as well as effective fighting force.
New army and air force chiefs: step up .. Angus Campbell
Here’s the prime mnister, shuffling decks on Russell Hill.
Today it is my honour and privilege to announce the new chiefs of army and of air force.
Lieutenant General Angus Campbell DSC AM will take up his role as chief of army from 16 May – and Air Vice Marshall Gavin Davis AO will take up his role as Chief of Air Force from July and he will be promoted to Air Marshal.
Abbott mentions we might know General Campbell. We do know General Campbell indeed.
General Campbell is familiar to you as head of Operation Sovereign Borders over the last couple of year. He has done exceptional work in this very difficult job.
Heads up.
Prime minister Abbott about to speak… It’s a six flag day. #auspol pic.twitter.com/TFZrYKgU91
— Mark Di Stefano (@MarkDiStef) March 25, 2015
Get a warrant, senator Brandis.
Get a warrant.
Green Scott Ludlam, just now, in the senate metadata debate.
Attorney-general, George Brandis:
The government opposes this amendment.
The prime minister Tony Abbott has scheduled a press conference. That’s coming very shortly.
Two other excellent stories I haven’t had a chance to share yet due to an overwelming urge to pick up my MacBook and smash it.
- Gabrielle Chan on farmers wanting an ETS. “A delegation of farmers has called for the Abbott government to act on climate change by restoring an emissions trading scheme, maintaining the current renewable energy target and spending on rail infrastructure to improve inland transport and reduce carbon emissions.”
- Lenore Taylor on a new compromising looming on the RET. “The renewable energy industry is trying to broker a deal to end the standoff between the Abbott government and Labor over the renewable energy target by suggesting the parties “split the difference”.
My technology is still tetchy. The senate is tetchy. Katy Gallagher has been sworn in successfully as the new senator for the ACT. The red room is back on the metadata debate.
Sorry I’m being sorely tested by non-compliant technology this morning.
Other stories in the political news cycle.
- David Crowe at The Australian reports that key members of the National Commission of Audit want Tony Abbott to go harder in May – they’ve urged “a renewed effort to limit spending in the May budget, out of concern at growing complacency over the scale of the problem, including annual interest payments of $16 billion on commonwealth debt. Days after Mr Abbott promised a “pretty dull and pretty routine” fiscal policy statement in May, commissioners declared that a “she’ll be right, mate” approach would condemn the nation to low growth with no hope of a budget surplus.
-
Jo Mather, Mark Ludlow and Jonathan Barrett report in the AFR: “The Commonwealth Grants Commission may have found Joe Hockey a solution to a stand-off with Western Australia about how federal funds are divided among the states – but it would cost the rest of Australia $547m.”
Updated
Looking ahead to a couple of events this morning.
- Immigration minister Peter Dutton will sign an MOU to further strengthen cooperation on migration matters with the visiting Cambodian deputy prime minister and minister of the interior Sar Kheng at 9.50am.
- The new Labor senator for the ACT, Katy Gallagher, will be sworn in at 9.30am. Gallagher replaces the retiring Kate Lundy. She’s a former chief minister of the ACT.
Hoop dreams
Poetry in motion. Assistant treasurer Josh Frydenberg, Labor MPs Tim Watts and Ed Husic.
Updated
As we’ve gone live a basketball match is underway between MPs and journalists. You can see from this picture that Sky political editor David Speers doesn’t only trip up the attorney-general George Brandis on the definition of metadata, he can also trip up National MP Darren Chester.
Reason and marshmallows
I confess politics does wear me down periodically. It can be hard to sustain my faith in progress. But then something happens to give me a little lift.
Andrew Bolt has this morning endorsed a return to evidence-based policies where reason rules and ratbags weep. Readers who might have followed the Bloguer Bolt’s various insights on climate science over many years may be surprised to learn of this premium Andrew places on reason and evidence. In any case, welcome Andrew. This is great news indeed.
Mark Latham meanwhile is rolling marshmallows between his thumb and index finger. Metaphorically of course. The metaphorical marshmallow is the leadership of federal Labor leader Bill Shorten, and Labor leaders in various states.
Latham, in the Australian Financial Review:
In Australia’s three biggest states we’ve witnessed a political role reversal: the Liberals as the party of policy initiative, the ALP as the party of reaction.
What’s happened to the once-great Labor movement, so that it now resembles a whining pressure group, rather than a conduit for big thinking and big ideas?
As for Shorten himself? Shorten is no kamikaze. He’s an opportunist, someone with a shameless record of using people and political issues to satisfy his personal ambitions. He’s sitting in his office right now, lining up his marshmallows for public consumption.
Are you thinking what I’m thinking B1? I think am B2. It’s the last parliamentary sitting day before the budget. Good morning and welcome to Thursday in Canberra.
The political morning is relatively peaceful thus far. Perhaps a few parliamentarians partied hard with the dancing fruit last night at the ABC’s annual showcase. Clive Palmer was clearly on for a few fine wines on the national broadcaster.
He wasn’t alone.
Looking ahead to the day. The senate has altered its sitting hours today in order to get the Abbott government’s metadata package through to a final vote. Given the sitting hours are now sit-til-you-drop I suspect that vote will happen before close of business – but in this place, nothing is ever done until its done.
As I mentioned on the blog late yesterday, as the debate bumps to its conclusion, the communications minister Malcolm Turnbull has named at least seven messaging services that journalists in particular (and presumably people in general) can use to avoid detection by the data retention regime he is pushing through parliament. Turnbull is only stating what would be obvious for tech savvy types – but it begs the question which has persisted throughout this debate – is this actually worth doing if the regime can be circumvented with a bit of not terribly onerous pre-planning? And will expanding the official surveillance footprint actually have peverse consequences, in effect encouraging people with evil intent to hide their communications from detection by agencies? We mouthy hacks at Guardian Australia have been asking these sorts of questions all along – but regardles of our persistent nit picking, parliament appears resolved on its current course.
You too can nit pick in the comments thread, which is now wide open for your business. You can also grab us on Twitter @murpharoo and @mpbowers Let’s grab Thursday and give it a red hot shake.
