Night-time politics
- The prime minister defended his three ministers who have been called to appear in the Victorian supreme court for remarks criticising terrorist sentences. Malcolm Turnbull said people have a right to criticise judges but not juries and defended their right to free speech. The attorney general, George Brandis, said his colleagues understood the independence of the judiciary. He confirmed the commonwealth solicitor general would act for the ministers in the court tomorrow.
- The prime minister’s off-the-record speech mimicking Donald Trump and making fun of himself at the press gallery ball was leaked to veteran journalist Laurie Oakes. The PM said he was disappointed but did not appear surprised at the leak out of more than a thousand attendees, many of them journalists. The US embassy said they took it in the good humour in which it was intended.
- The Chinese ambassador, Cheng Jingye, criticised the ABC Four Corners program on Chinese donations and foreign influence, comparing the allegations to reheated cold rice. He said they were designed to instigate a China panic.
- The Greens managed to pass a bill through the Senate, which is designed to establish a rare commission of inquiry into the banks. It was brought to the House but remains in debate. Having initially said he would vote for such a commission, LNP MP George Christensen did not support procedural motions to further the bill’s success but, after Julie Bishop missed a vote, the bill remains before the parliament.
- This is the last sitting day until Monday.
- Tomorrow, there will be a Senate inquiry into the bank levy, which will feature bank executives questioned by senators.
Thanks for your company and to my brains trust, Katharine Murphy, Gareth Hutchens and Paul Karp. Mikey Bowers is wrecked but happy he produced the goods. See George and Barnaby.
Good night.
Updated
@TurnbullMalcolm There's always a leak.
— House of Cards (@HouseofCards) June 15, 2017
Statement from the US embassy in Canberra on @TurnbullMalcolm's leaked Trump joke @SBSNews pic.twitter.com/y4tSCbG2jb
— Rashida Yosufzai (@Rashidajourno) June 15, 2017
I agree.
For the record. My personal view is @LaurieOakes is correct. speeches need not be off record. Makes journalists look ridiculous defending it
— Samantha Maiden (@samanthamaiden) June 15, 2017
President of the press gallery committee Andrew Meares has put out a statement on the Turnbull speech.
The Midwinter Ball is a private event hosted by the Federal Parliamentary Press Gallery and attended by guests from all parties and corporate sponsors.
The Ball has raised over $3.8m for charity since its inception.
Our guest speakers, the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition, speak on the understanding that their words remain “off the record”.
The event has a long tradition of being a light-hearted evening with a strong tone of self deprecation. The leaders’ speeches this year reflected this sentiment brilliantly.
The Ball Committee is disappointed that some guests at the Ball have not complied with the non-publication request.
Christensen: I was going to vote for the bank inquiry but
George Christensen has put out a statement on the bank commission.
I walked into parliament this afternoon with the intention of voting for a commission of inquiry (which is the same as a royal commission) into the banks. Then Labor stuffed it.
They voted to schedule debate on a bill that would establish a commission of inquiry on the 7th of August - a date that parliament isn’t even sitting. How can you debate something in parliament on a date when parliament isn’t even in session?
What’s worse is that the Speaker informed us that parliament doesn’t have the power to dictate what’s scheduled on any sitting day; that’s the role of the parliament’s selection committee. In other words, Labor’s motion did nothing to further the cause of establishing a royal commission into the banks and so it didn’t have my support.
Let’s just do a recap on what happened on the bank inquiry bill.
This morning, the Senate passed a bill that would establish a rare commission of inquiry into bank behaviour, in the absence of a government-appointed royal commission. (On the advice of the clerk of the Senate, the parliament can establish the machinery of an inquiry, including appointing judges, but it needs the government to fund the commission.)
But the bill has to pass the house so Labor and the Greens sprang it on in the afternoon. Greens MP Adam Bandt and independent Bob Katter spoke to the motion.
In order for the inquiry to get up, it requires two government MPs to cross the floor to succeed to get an absolute majority of 76. George Christensen has previously predicted he would vote for the bill. Labor and the Greens would need one other government MP to cross the floor.
Then Labor tried to delay the debate on the bill until the spring session because a number of MPs were away and the numbers were not there today to succeed.
In the process, Labor mucked up the date on a motion but quickly corrected it.
Christensen, who had been openly and strongly leaned on by his leader Barnaby Joyce, Christopher Pyne and others in the chamber, used the Labor error as a reason for not voting for it. Clearly this is an excuse for not crossing his party as it had nothing to do with the substance of the banking issue.
Eventually, the question was put, and without George, it looked like the whole move was dead. But Julie Bishop did not make it back to the chamber in time for the vote and was locked out.
This meant there was a tie of 70-70 and the Speaker used his casting vote, as he told Murph he would in a podcast, by allowing debate to be continued. The effect is that he stands aside without helping either party.
The upshot is that the bank commission of inquiry bill lives to fight another day.
Updated
The bank commission of inquiry division surprised a few people.
Crossbench votes with Labor for the banking inquiry move.
Updated
Malcolm on that speech: the butt of my jokes were myself
Malcolm Turnbull addressing the Laurie Oakes story on Turnbull’s speech last night at the Midwinter Ball, which is supposed to be off the record. Oakes did not go, so was the recipient of a leaked recording. In it, Turnbull mimics Trump and his meeting with the US president.
Turnbull appears unfazed.
I am disappointed so I guess what that means in next year’s Midwinter Ball is that I will read selected excerpts from budget paper No.2 ... It was lighthearted, affectionate, good natured and the butt of my jokes was myself.
He says politics is a tough business and this was a bit of fun.
You’ve got to have a laugh. You’ve got to lighten up.
Updated
Malcolm Turnbull is speaking on 3AW. He says he stands for freedom of speech for his ministers and the right to criticise judges. People are entitled to criticise judges but a different story when there is a jury.
I stand for rule of law, democracy and freedom of speech.
Now, it being 4.30pm on a Thursday, the House is automatically going into adjournment so the debate for a banking inquiry lives to fight another day.
FYI, the reason we have this set adjournment times is the last Labor procedural shenanigans when the government lost a couple of votes shortly after it won the 2016 election when it was not used to a wafer-thin majority.
The rule changes were made after that.
Updated
Much of Shorten’s attack centred on George Christensen, who did not vote with Labor, Greens and indies to delay the vote in order for it to have a chance of winning.
Christensen says if Labor got its dates right, he might have voted for it.
Updated
So the vote on the question was tied 70-70.
The Speaker used his casting votes to break a deadlock and continue the debate. From the minutes,
The numbers for the “ayes” and the “noes” being equal, the Speaker gave his casting vote with the “noes” to allow continued debate.
This has allowed Bill Shorten to go into full flight on the need for a bank royal commission.
He is actually supposed to be talking to the amendment to delay this vote until the spring sitting session (to give it a chance of winning).
Updated
Julie Bishop has got locked out of the chamber for the crucial division.
So, to be clear, Labor and the Greens are trying to put off the bill because they need a raw majority of 76 votes to win the bank inquiry.
Because Kelly O’Dwyer is paired, the numbers are down so we can’t have a vote now.
Labor suggests putting the debate off until August 14.
Christopher Pyne has accused Labor of trying to get around the standing orders.
Speaker Smith says he does not agree.
He says the selection committee loses no powers under the Labor manoeuvre.
The House is entitled to pass a resolution calling on the selection committee to do certain things but it can’t enforce them.
That is, it can’t enforce the selection committee to bring on the bank inquiry bill for a vote.
The only way it can force the committee is to change the rules (standing order 41).
The house is voting on the resolution now.
Updated
How to win friends and influence people.
Updated
Labor is going to some procedural stuff on the bank commission of inquiry to determine how the bank bill shall be treated.
It is about trying to ensure that the the bank bill is considered and voted on.
Labor wants the house to get a vote to tell the parliamentary selection committee that the bank inquiry bill should be heard.
Labor briefly has to amend their dates as to when the banking inquiry bill should be heard because the parliament was not sitting on the first dates lodged.
Christopher Pyne calls Labor a shambles and attacks them for standing with One Nation, Nick Xenophon and the Greens (in support of the bank inquiry bill).
Independent Bob Katter is seconding Adam Bandt’s motion.
He is talking about the lack of power on the part of customers when signing a contract with a bank.
Warren Entsch was the other bloke most likely to cross the floor but he has already told Paul Karp he will not cross the floor.
I underline we are in intuition territory here but it looks as though Entsch has been sent in to try to talk George off the ledge.
It will all become clear soon.
The weight of leadership.
This might be an indication of which way George Christensen is voting on the banks inquiry bill.
Greens bring on banks commission of inquiry bill
Greens MP Adam Bandt is bringing on the Commission of Inquiry bill now in the lower house.
We shall see if the two government MPs required cross the floor. George Christensen has previously pledged to cross the floor. But they would need one more vote.
Bandt’s speech concentrates on rural members, by talking about farms going under as a result of bank behaviour.
For all of you members who have spoken up for your constituents before ... now is the time to do it.
Updated
Labor’s Joel Fitzgibbon has made a personal explanation at the end of question time. He described the attack on him by foreign minister Julie Bishop (in question time) and Barnaby Joyce (on Sky) as “unfounded” and “reckless” and in the case of Joyce defamatory.
Joyce said of Fitzgibbon - his shadow - that he had questions to answer regarding during his time as defence minister.
I reserve my rights, Fitzgibbon told the chamber.
Brandis says colleagues well aware of independence of judiciary
Attorney general, George Brandis, has told the Senate he discovered on Wednesday that three Coalition MPs (Greg Hunt, Alan Tudge and Michael Sukkar) had been invited to appear in the Victorian supreme court to justify their comments on sentencing and explain why they weren’t in contempt of court.
He confirms he has authorised the commonwealth solicitor general to appear for them.
Asked whether he has impressed on his three colleagues the need for an independent judiciary, Brandis replies:
My colleagues are well aware of the importance of the independence of the judiciary ... The independence of the judiciary has never been understood, by the judiciary themselves, to be a prohibition against criticism.
He cites a Victorian supreme court case, Crown v Witt, that freedom of speech extends to criticism of judicial decisions, including “robust observations of a particular decision or penalty”.
Updated
Mark Butler to PM: I refer to the prime minister’s answer to the member for Sydney. Is the prime minister aware that modelling in the Finkel report concludes no new coal-fired power stations will be built under a clean energy target? The chief scientist said about coal-fired power stations, I quote, “It would be surprising if governments were to endorse a scheme that incentivised them”. Does the prime minister agree with the chief scientist?
Josh Frydenberg takes the question.
He makes it clear that when it comes to coal, under the Clean Energy Target, it will stay in the system longer and will create a level of regulatory certainty, and you’re more likely as an existing coal operator, to be able to go to your financiers and get the money to do an upgrade that is required. The chief scientist was asked, could a new coal-fired power station be built? He said it is conceivable. That is the key point.
Updated
Jason Clare to PM: I refer to the bid by the Chinese company Landbridge to operate the Port of Darwin and refer to subsequently it gave the former minister for trade Andrew Robb a part-time position paying $880,000 a year. Has he asked his department to investigate whether there is a link between these two events? And has he asked them to investigate whether there’s been a breach of the ministerial code of conduct?
Turnbull has asked Martin Parkinson, the head of his department, to investigate. Parkinson confirmed his findings in a letter.
As you know I’ve twice discussed with Andrew Robb obligations placed on former ministers by the statement of ministerial standards, 28 February and 31 May 2017. Mr Robb assured me he understands and complied in particular to paragraph 2.24 in terms of post-cabinet and post-parliament activities and reiterated that commitment in writing on 1 June 2017. I will table that letter.
(Just off the top, this seems like a narrow investigation.)
According to the code, that section says:
Ministers are required to undertake that, for an 18-month period after ceasing to be a minister, they will not lobby, advocate or have business meetings with members of the government, parliament, public service or defence force on any matters on which they have had official dealings as minister in their last 18 months in office. Ministers are also required to undertake that, on leaving office, they will not take personal advantage of information to which they have had access as a minister, where that information is not generally available to the public.
Updated
Labor’s Jason Clare to the PM: Media reports state a trust linked to a Chinese donor made a $50,000 donation to former trade and investment minister Andrew Robb’s fundraising vehicle, the Bayside Forum, on the exact same day Mr Robb finalised the China-Australia free trade agreement. Does the prime minister seriously expect the Australian people to believe it was just a coincidence that a Chinese donor paid $50,000 to Mr Robb’s fundraiser on the same day he finalised the China FTA?
Speaker Smith rules the question out of order because it doesn’t relate to the PM’s responsibilities.
Updated
Labor’s Matt Keogh to Julie Bishop: Yesterday in question time, when asked about the Julie Bishop Glorious Foundation which had been established by one of the Liberal party’s biggest donors, a mining magnate, the minister said she had never stood next to a Chinese benefactor. Does the minister stand by that answer? Is it a fact that there are photos of her standing next to Chinese benefactors ... Just like how we were told yesterday the naming of the foundation had nothing to do with her and was just a coincidence?
Bishop says the word glorious and Keogh would never be in the same sentence, and then goes on.
It goes to show that Labor has no understanding of the difference between attending a Chinese banquet and lining up for selfie or photo after photo after photo. I assume that members opposite are asked for photographs, at banquets and public events, I’m assuming. There is a vast difference between standing and having your photograph taken, whether it at a public event, or Chinese banquet or walking through the airport and standing at the commonwealth parliamentary offices.
She draws a line to Sam Dastyari.
Updated
Julie Bishop gets another Dixer on Chinese donations.
Bishop attacks former defence minister Joel Fitzgibbon.
She says:
Labor did a sudden about-face on an important foreign policy position and abruptly announced Australia’s withdrawal from a quadridateral security dialogue between Australia, the United States, Japan and India, at the behest of China.
It begs the question – what role did the member for Hunter play as a member of the national security committee and the minister for Defence, in that extraordinary about-face and backflip on the part of the Labor government with no explanation?
Updated
Plibersek to Turnbull: Is the government considering adopting a threshold that would subsidise new coal-fired power stations to be built under its clean energy target? Under this prime minister, is coal now clean energy? As a matter of government policy, are there any forms of energy that are not considered clean energy?
Turnbull quotes Shorten from an old ABC interview when he said:
For some people who believe the way to solve climate change is to shut down coal. That answer is not going to give you any joy at all. We’re also supporting clean coal technology. Australia does have a lot of coal.
Turnbull says the government’s aim is to ensure that energy is affordable, secure and reliable, and that meet the emission reduction commitments, addressing “the trilemma”.
Updated
Justice minister Michael Keenan informs the house the NSW joint counter-terrorism team has arrested a 20-year-old man at Sydney airport for allegedly attempting to travel to Syria to fight alongside Islamic State.
Updated
Shorten to Turnbull: It’s reported today that the Business Council of Australia has said that if there isn’t a clean energy target, what’s the alternative? They’ve said that if Australia continues to do nothing, we will continue to pay higher prices and have a less secure electricity supply. Does the prime minister agree and will the prime minister now commit to work with Labor in the national interest to end the policy paralysis which led to instability in the energy market?
Turnbull says Shorten’s smirk shows he is not serious about bipartisanship.
He again says there is a gas shortage which is pushing power prices up on the east coast.
By imposing the export controls ... we have already seen a reduction in wholesale gas prices in the east coast. We have secured supply of gas for peak power in the summer.
Updated
Greens MP Adam Bandt to Peter Dutton: How many Coalition or Liberal party members, including but not limited, have approached you or the department to facilitate or inquire after the status of efforts by a person to obtain Australian citizenship?
Dutton says since late October 2014, there have been 7,500 requests from MPs.
For example, Chris Bowen has written 183 letters in support since 2014, Tony Burke has written 21, Anthony Albanese has written 25.
Dutton says it is entirely appropriate and he commends MPs for representing their constituents. But he does not give Coalition numbers. He says it often is a result of the make-up of their electorates.
Updated
Labor’s Jim Chalmers to Turnbull: Tomorrow for the first time in Australia’s history, gross debt will crash through half a trillion dollars. Does the prime minister agree with the assistant minister to the treasurer who said earlier today that under this government there is, and I quote - a “truckload of debt and an absolutely extraordinary amount of debt”.
Turnbull goes on a bit about Chalmers having worked for former Labor treasurer Wayne Swan.
Labor left us with debt and then, on losing government, have done everything they can to prevent us getting the budget back into balance. The leader of the opposition talks about tax cuts for millionaires. He loves that. The old champion of the poor and oppressed there. Storming the barricades, sort of, you know, red flag flying, he’s such a hero. The reality is, why are we getting the budget back to balance?
Updated
Bowen to Turnbull: Tomorrow for the first time in Australia’s history gross debt will crash through half a trillion dollars. So how can the prime minister possibly justify giving big business a $65bn tax cut?
Treasurer Scott Morrison takes the question.
If the shadow treasurer is concerned about the level of debt in his country, he should apologise ... It wasn’t just that they couldn’t control their expenditure and their expenditure grew at twice the rate ... that has occurred under this government. What did they spend it on? Overpriced school halls. Setting fire to people’s roofs with their pink batts program.
Morrison goes into the good-debt-bad-debt formulation, a move forward on the debt-and-deficit-disaster formulation that we used to hear.
Then he says if Labor does not want to see higher gross debt, they can’t build the Western Sydney Airport or the Inland Rail.
Updated
The first government Dixer is on the citizenship laws. Turnbull condemns Labor’s concerns over the citizenship bill.
Christopher Pyne yells at the opposition, “you’re a rabble”.
Updated
Carly's law to protect minors online has passed
The Criminal Code Amendment (Protecting Minors Online) Bill 2017, also known as “Carly’s Law”, has passed the Senate without amendment.
Shorten to Turnbull: Tomorrow for the first time in Australia’s history, gross debt will crash through half a trillion dollars. So how can the prime minister possibly justify giving millionaires a $16,400 tax cut in just 16 days’ time?
Turnbull says there is no one less qualified than Shorten to give lectures on debt.
Fresh from tucking his knees under the table of all his rich mates, fresh from selling out the members of the AWU, selling out penalty rates, fresh, glowing in hypocrisy, as this champion of the poor and oppressed, he then complains about tax cuts for millionaires. Well, is that anyone who earns over $180,000 is a millionaire? Is that right? It wasn’t so long ago he said on Melbourne radio people who earn over $180,000 are middle-income. They are the people he wants to keep on taxing.
Updated
Lunchtime politics
- Three ministers have to explain themselves to the Victorian Supreme court for criticising the sentencing of terrorists. The Australian’s editor and journalist Simon Benson have also been issued with a please explain. Education minister Simon Birmingham says people expect politicians to speak their minds. Senator David Leyonhjelm reckons it does not constitute contempt because his definition for that involves a brown eye.
- The Chinese ambassador Cheng Jingye has had a crack at Four Corners, referring to the episode regarding Chinese government influence and political donations as “overnight cold rice”, i.e. reheated old allegations.
- The government is looking at the regulation of deductible gift recipient organisations.
- Unemployment has dropped from 5.7% to 5.5% but underemployment remains high.
- Question time coming up.
Updated
Dutton’s new bill blocks citizenship by birth for some kids. This is the section in the current act. Initial takeaways... 1/7 #auspol pic.twitter.com/8P8YHCqBaF
— Jackson Gothe-Snape (@jacksongs) June 15, 2017
.@leerhiannon's and @HumanHeadline's motion calling on the Govt to ban the live export of horses, donkeys and ponies has passed the Senate. pic.twitter.com/UJ4GdpSLkQ
— 🌏 Tim Beshara (@Tim_Beshara) June 15, 2017
Unemployment drops but underemployment remains high
AAP reports:
The jobless rate unexpectedly has tumbled to its lowest level in more than four years on the back of a big jump in employment numbers.
New figures on Thursday showed 42,000 people joined the workforce in May, four times as many expected by economists.
As a result, the unemployment rate dropped to 5.5% from 5.7% in April.
The 52,100 new full-time jobs were offset by a 10,100 drop in part-time workers.
The unemployment rate has now fallen from 5.9% in two months.
Employment Minister Michaelia Cash, in a tweet, noted the unemployment rate was at its lowest since February 2013.
Unemployment rate drops from 5.7% to 5.5%: the lowest rate since Feb 2013. The Turnbull Govt is focussed on job creation. #auspol
— Michaelia Cash (@SenatorCash) June 15, 2017
However underemployment remains high. The number of people seeking additional work remains at around 1.1 million, with the underemployment rate at 8.8% and only a shade below the record 8.9% set in February.
Updated
Warren Entsch won't support the bank commission of inquiry
Now that the Greens bank commission of inquiry bill has passed the Senate, focus is turning to the House of Representatives and whether any Coalition MPs, such as George Christensen or others, will cross the floor.
Liberal MP Warren Entsch told Guardian Australia he will not cross the floor and derided the bank commission of inquiry bill as “a bit of showmanship and chest-beating”.
We don’t need another inquiry, we need to get cases [of bank wrongdoing] dealt with, to get an entity for [victims] to be heard and get enforceable determinations.
An inquiry would be more of the same, and it actually suits banks who will be able to delay and delay.
Entsch said he wanted to deal with historical cases of bank wrongdoing, and the Australian Financial Complaints Authority announced in the May budget “went part of the way” by resolving individual consumer and investor disputes, and small business disputes of value below $5m.
Barnaby Joyce: you better be a patriot
DPM Barnaby Joyce was asked about the Australian political system and its potential for influence by foreign powers.
We don’t care if you are saint or a sinner or a priest or a pastor, whatever you are, you better be a patriot. You better believe in this nation and, on either side of the political fence, we are not going to make excuses for people – or we shouldn’t – by people who have their interests affected by pecuniary benefit to them, especially if it is going directly into their pocket. That is just not on.
Updated
Deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce is on Sky, speaking about power.
Joyce says we can’t be religious about energy policies. People are still building coal-fired power stations overseas. There is no reason why they would not build them here.
Asked if the government should build them, he says state governments used to build them. It is their purview but the federal government is trying to get the policies right. He does not directly answer that question.
Updated
Senate calls on intelligence and security committee to examine foreign influence
The Senate has passed a Labor motion which recognises the reports of the influence of foreign powers in domestic political and electoral affairs.
Senator Don Farrell’s motion also calls on the prime minister to:
support a bipartisan multi-partisan reference to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) to inquire into and report on possible measures to address the risk posed by foreign governments and their agents seeking to improperly interfere in Australia’s domestic political and electoral affairs.
Amendment post: I originally reported the motion called for the minor parties and the Greens to be added to the PJCIS for any foreign influence inquiry. This was an error as it related to a Greens amendment which did not pass.
Updated
Simon Birmingham: people expect politicians to speak their minds
Education minister, Simon Birmingham, has addressed the contempt of court controversy at a doorstop in Canberra:
I think when Australian people vote for their elected representatives, they expect [them] to speak their mind. They expect [them] to stand up on issues the community are concerned about, that the community might think are unfair or bad outcomes.
That applies as much to sentencing decisions of courts as to any other issue where people expect democratically elected representatives to stand up, to speak their mind, to argue the case on the behalf of their community - and that is all I’ve seen from my Victorian colleagues.
Birmingham said concerns about sentencing were “legitimate community concerns”.
Updated
The Julie Bishop glorious foundation garment.
David Leyonhjelm on ministers: contempt of the court is when you do a brown eye
Liberal Democrat senator David Leyonhjelm has defended ministers Hunt, Sukkar and Tudge over the action with the Victorian courts.
Frankly I think contempt of the court is when you do a brown eye. It’s not contemptuous to criticise judges or the decisions of a court. Politicians get criticised all the time, often in a very contemptuous way and they are elected. Judges are not elected and these dear little daffodils are saying we shouldn’t be criticised for the way we are doing our job. And they are not elected. They are showing contempt for free speech. That is what it amounts to.
There is so much happening in the senate this morning.
Regarding Roberts’ contention that Greens are human racists, he did co-sponsor the Greens commission of inquiry bill.
Malcolm Roberts says the Greens are the "worst kinds of racists. They are HUMAN racists!!" #Adani
— Karen Barlow (@KJBar) June 15, 2017
Chinese ambassador responds to donations allegations
I need to bring you the full Chinese ambassador Cheng Jingye’s speech from the Australia China Business Council.
It’s a great pleasure for me to attend this year’s Canberra Networking Day opening. I look forward to meeting you this evening at the reception in the Chinese embassy and sharing with you some of my thoughts on furthering our two countries’ economic and trade cooperation.
I would like to take this opportunity to make a few remarks about a program called “Power and influence of china”, broadcast recently by ABC. It alleges that the Chinese government was behind the donations made to major political parties in this country by some Chinese or Australian Chinese business people, with the aim to “influence” Australian politics and foreign policy. What a sensational report. The spokesperson of Chinese foreign ministry has already given response to it in the first instance. Now I just want to add the following:
Firstly, what was reported in the program is basically a kind of platitude. I’ve heard the allegations more than once since I was posted here. In Chinese, we call it “cook up the overnight cold rice”, which means repeating the same old stuff again and again. Maybe the producers of the program believe that those groundless allegations may turn to be truth after repeating thousand times. Those who have fabricated the allegations really have an imagination that is wild and morbid. If they were to apply their imagination to scientific research, they might be accorded with a Nobel prize someday.
Secondly, as the allegations being made up out of thin air, a few people are still bent on spreading them. This only show, that they are politically motivated. Apparently those people are not willing to see the continuing growth of the friendly cooperation between our two countries and two peoples. Their main purpose is to instigate China panic. A scholar interviewed by the program recently wrote that the program is not about Sinophobia. But this reminds me of an old Chinese saying “the more one tries to hide, the more his intention is exposed”.
Over the years, China has been committed to developing and enhancing friendly relations with all other countries on the basis of the five principles of peaceful coexistence, which is an important cornerstone of China’s foreign policy. Its crux is mutual respect for each others’ territorial integrity and sovereignty and non-interference in each others’ internal affairs. In modern history, China suffered immensely from external aggression and bully. We have a deeper understanding of the importance of territorial integrity, sovereignty and non-interference. The ancient Chinese philosopher Confucius said, “Do not do to others what you do not want others to do to you.” China firmly pursues a path of development that is consistent with its own national conditions. We have no intention to impose our development model on others and in turn, we expect others to respect our development path, not trying to impose their social system and values on China.
China’s transformation from a poor and weak country into the world’s second-largest economy has been achieved not by military expansion or colonial plunder, but through the hard work of its people and the wise leadership of the Chinese Communist party. It’s true that China’s development has benefited a lot from the international community and the regional peace and stability. But it’s also true that China has made significant contributions to the world’s development and the maintenance of regional peace and stability. Though China being the second-largest economy, it still is a developing country which has a long way to go in its modernisation drive. China will never waver in its pursuit of peaceful development and win-win cooperation. China will firmly uphold the international order with the UN charter as its core and the multilateral trade system with WTO as its core, as well as the global climate governance based on the Paris agreement. No matter how strong its economy grows, China will stick to the purposes and principles of the UN charter, instead of seeking hegemony, expansion or sphere of influence.
This year marks the 45th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and Australia. In the past 45 years, we have witnessed the rapid growth of our friendly relations and economic cooperation, which has not only delivered real benefits to the two peoples, but also contributed in no small measure to the steady growth of our two economies. The development of our relations can’t be persistent without the support of friendly groups like ACBC. I sincerely hope today’s event could bring positive impact on our mutual beneficial cooperation and mutual political trust.
Updated
Advocacy by groups with deductible gift recipient status
Regular politics watchers will know the Coalition has an agenda to impose regulations on activist groups because the government is concerned that the environment movement and groups like GetUp are running campaigns that assist the progressive side of politics.
As part of reforming donations, the Coalition has flagged a ban on foreign contributions to political parties and to activist groups, on the basis there needs to be a level playing field between political actors and non-political actors.
Separately, the government is looking at the regulation of deductible gift recipient organisations. The finance minister, Mathias Cormann, has issued a discussion paper on this question today.
The government is clearly flagging more regulation, and has again flagged concerns about advocacy.
Here’s a brief excerpt from the new discussion paper.
The government provides a substantial financial contribution to not-for-profit entities through tax concessions. The cost to the commonwealth of deductions from donations to deductible gift recipient organisations (DGR) is $1.31bn in 2016-17 rising to an estimated $1.46bn in 2019-20.
Once an entity is a DGR, it is generally for life, and is subject to minimal governance unless it is an Australian Charities and Not-for-Profits Commission (ACNC) regulated charity. Given the generous tax concessions they receive, it is appropriate to require DGRs to be transparent in their dealings and to adhere to appropriate governance standards.
There are also concerns that some charities and DGRs undertake advocacy activity that may be out of step with the expectations of the broader community, particularly by environmental DGRs which must have a principal purpose of protecting the environment.
As we move towards various policy crunch points in this still nascent debate, I predict things are going to get hot.
Updated
The Senate is now debating Greens senator Larissa Waters’ private senators bill known as the environment and infrastructure legislation amendment (stop Adani) bill 2017.
Among other things,
It proposes to make sure that the Australian government cannot hand out $1bn to Adani for their coal railway via the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility (Naif) by creating a broad “suitable person” test under the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Act 2016.
LNP senator Ian Macdonald made a vociferous response, ending with THANK YOU ADANI.
Updated
Updated
Updated
Updated
To be clear, the Senate voted 38-20 on the bank bill to put the vote, then it passed on voices.
This meant potential government supporters of the bank commission like Nationals senator and bank campaigner John Williams and other bank critics did not have to actually cross the floor. We don’t know which way they would have voted because Greens, Labor and the crossbenchers had the numbers anyway.
Updated
The Senate has just passed a bill to set up a parliamentary commission of inquiry into the bank sector, which would have similar powers to a royal commission.
The bill passed without amendments on the voices.
The #Senate has agreed to the Banking and Financial Services Commission of Inquiry Bill 2017 without amendments
— Australian Senate (@AuSenate) June 15, 2017
It’s unclear whether the bill will be brought on in the lower house, which has not passed it.
Updated
Chinese ambassador says donation stories designed to instigate China panic
"Cook up the overnight gold rice" China's Ambassador slams @4corners @CUhlmann & @Ageinvestigates report into Chinese influence #auspol pic.twitter.com/itZxp6bsi8
— Matthew Doran (@MattDoran91) June 15, 2017
Doran’s quote, by the way, is meant to say “cook up the overnight cold rice”.
Things are accelerating here.
Peter Dutton introduces the Citizenship amendment legislation #reps @GuardianAus @gabriellechan #politicslive pic.twitter.com/jhreCRPs0r
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) June 15, 2017
PDuddy, the artist otherwise known as immigration minister Peter Dutton, is presenting the citizenship bill.
It amends a gazillion things so I will bring you some relevant ones as the chambers are competing for our attention today.
The explanatory memo says the citizenship bill would:
- increase the general residence requirement to require citizenship-by-conferral applicants to have been a permanent resident for at least four years before they are eligible to apply for citizenship;
- require most applicants to provide evidence of competent English language proficiency before they can make a valid application for citizenship;
- require applicants to sign an Australian values statement in order to make a valid application for citizenship;
- require applicants to demonstrate their integration into the Australian community, including by behaving in a manner consistent with the Australian values that applicants commit to when they sign the Australian values statement;
- amend the preamble to recognise that people who are conferred Australian citizenship undertake to accept the obligation to pledge their allegiance to Australia and its people, and to share Australian values;
- allow for the Australian Citizenship Regulation 2016 or an instrument made under the act to determine the information or documents that must be provided with an application in order for it to be a valid application;
-
allow for the minister to determine eligibility criteria for sitting the citizenship test that may relate to the fact that a person has previously failed the test, did not comply with one or more rules of conduct relating to the test, or was found to have cheated during the test;
-
rename the “pledge of commitment” the “pledge of allegiance” and amend the pledge to require a person to pledge their allegiance to Australia and its people;
-
extend the requirement to make the pledge of allegiance to all persons aged 16 and over intending to acquire citizenship by descent, persons adopted in accordance with the Hague convention on intercountry adoption or a bilateral agreement, persons intending to acquire citizenship by resumption, and persons intending to acquire citizenship by conferral who have satisfied the criteria for a person born to a former Australian citizen, a person born in Papua or a person who has satisfied the criteria relating to statelessness; and
- allow for the regulation or an instrument made under the act to introduce a two-year bar on a person making an application for citizenship where the minister has refused to approve the person becoming an Australian citizen on grounds other than failure to meet the residence requirement.
Updated
Greens bring on Senate debate into commission of inquiry into banks
This would be essentially a royal commission appointed by the parliament into the banks.
It is a very rare thing, only done once before and never completed. The bill is brought by Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson but cosponsored by Pauline Hanson, Derryn Hinch, Jacqui Lambie, Malcolm Roberts and Nick Xenophon.
I have written about this before, following advice from the then clerk of the Senate:
The opposition and minor parties could force a rare and powerful “commission of inquiry” into the banks if the Coalition refuses a royal commission, according to the clerk of the Senate, Rosemary Laing.
And the Senate’s key parliamentary adviser said if the commission of inquiry bill won a majority in both houses it would be an outcome that “any government would find difficult to resist”.
Laing has advised the Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson that parliament could establish the inquiry, similar to that set up to investigate former Labor minister and high court justice Lionel Murphy by the Hawke government.
Updated
A storm of bills have hit the house. The minister responsible for communications in the lower house, Paul Fletcher, is outlining the media reforms.
Here is the guts of it from the explanatory memo for the bill:
The bill comprises the following measures:
- reforming outdated media regulation contained in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (BSA) to better reflect the contemporary digital media environment, including repealing the “75% audience reach rule” and the “two out of three cross-media control rule”;
- amending and introducing some additional local programming obligations under the BSA for regional commercial television broadcasting licensees, where, as a result of a change in control, their licences become part of a group of commercial television licences whose combined licence area populations exceed 75% of the Australian population;
- amendments to the anti-siphoning scheme under the BSA and the anti-siphoning notice;
- permanently abolishing annual television and radio licence fees, and datacasting charges payable by commercial broadcasters;
- removing apparatus taxes payable by commercial broadcasters;
- establishing tax collection and assessment arrangements for the new interim transmitter licence tax and establishing a statutory review of new tax arrangements in 2021 consistent with the broader review of spectrum pricing underway;
- establishing a transitional support payment scheme for 19 commercial broadcasters to ensure that there is no commercial broadcaster that will be worse-off during the first five years as a result of the transition from a revenue-based licence fee and charge arrangement to new interim transmitter licence tax arrangements.
Updated
Labor finance shadow Jim Chalmers says the debt will be at a record high under a government whose entire reason for being was to pay down the debt.
Chalmers says the Coalition has failed their own test.
When gross debt was projected to be $300bn, Malcolm Turnbull described it as frightening and almost inconceivable. Today we call on him to describe what half $1tn in gross debt is.
Updated
Labor treasury and finance shadows Chris Bowen and Jim Chalmers marked in inglorious milestone just now.
Gross debt will pass half $1tn, Bowen says.
This is a government which told us that if debt was the problem, more debt is not the answer. They told us there was a debt and deficit disaster and this has happened under their watch.
The government will say, it is net debt that counts and I agree that net debt is an important measure but even on net debt it will peak at a level not seen under any Labor government in history apart from the financing of world war two.
Updated
LNP MP George Christensen and NXT MP Rebekha Sharkie held a press conference to release their private members bill to stop the penalty rate cuts.
The legislation would stop the Fair Work Commission decision to reduce penalty rates for retail, fast food, tourism and hospitality workers which takes effect on 1 July.
It also reinstates Sunday penalty rates for those workers whose individual take-home pay is less under an enterprise bargaining agreement than it would be under award rates.
This is about ensuring that no worker is worse off when it comes to Sunday take-home pay, regardless of whether they are facing that pay cut as a result of the Fair Work Commission decision, or whether they’ve already had their take-home pay cut as a result of deals done between big unions and big business.
For example a mum who works only on Sundays at KFC in my electorate is already the victim of an AWU agreement which cuts her take-home pay from $221.61 down to $160.96, so she is $60 worse off thanks to the actions of her union.
The bill will be tabled in parliament next Monday.
Updated
Updated
Updated
Let me intervene in this ball-o-rama for a minute to bring you a short Labor statement on the ministers’ impending court appearance.
The shadow attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, has issued a one-line statement:
This contempt proceeding against three serving ministers is a very serious matter – and we will not be commenting further at this point.
Updated
Goodenough wins, hands down.
Updated
Updated
Updated
Updated
Updated
The press gallery’s Midwinter Ball was held last night. So far, it has raised over $3m for assorted charities.
Updated
Good morning good blogans,
Last night news broke that three Turnbull government ministers, health minister Greg Hunt, assistant treasurer Michael Sukkar and human services minister Alan Tudge have received letters asking them to appear in court on Friday “to make submissions as to why you should not be referred for prosecution for contempt”.
Fairfax Media has reported the ministers received a letter from Judicial Registrar Ian Irving after their comments were published in the The Australian accusing the judiciary of going soft on terrorists. The Oz reports that its editor Paul Whittaker and journalist Simon Benson have also been asked to appear.
AAP reports:
The attributed statements appear to intend to bring the court into disrepute to assert the judges have and will apply an ideologically based predisposition in deciding the case or cases and that the judges will not apply the law,” a letter by judicial registrar Ian Irving seen by Fairfax says.
Contempt of court proceedings aim to uphold the administration of justice, and can be initiated by the court when there are concerns a case may be undermined.
Contempt is criminal in nature, but it generally follow the same process of civil proceedings. Because it’s part of the court’s inherent jurisdiction, punishment for contempt can vary considerably.
As if that is not enough to go on with, the lower house will finally see bills on media reform and the contentious citizenship changes as well as the ongoing debate on the Medicare levy and the bank levy.
Plus we have all the photos from the press ball last night, including the Julie Bishop Glorious Foundation garment. Talk to me in the thread, on the Twits @gabriellechan or on Facebook.
Updated
