Parliament is winding down, and people are getting ready to flee the hill in droves, so we are going to leave it here tonight.
We will be back in about three weeks and who knows what could have happened in that time. It’s a very, very brave person who makes any sort of prediction about Australian politics these days.
Other than it is bound to be a little insane.
When we come back, we will be in the downhill slide of the Wentworth byelection, which is what the Liberal party will be occupying themselves with in the next few weeks. Internal polling has Kerryn Phelps as a pretty big threat. Preferences are going to be very, very important.
Will we see any more helpful interventions from New York? Again, only time will tell.
Speaking of the big apple, Ann Sudmalis and Jenny Macklin are both off to the UN, so we won’t be seeing them for the rest of the year.
And the section 44 concerns surrounding Peter Dutton are not going anywhere either, so keep an eye on that.
In the mean time, let’s see what policy gets suggested between now and the next parliament sitting. The Senate only has one week scheduled next month, while the House of Representatives has two, with estimates taking up the Senate’s attention in that second week – so Michaelia Cash will be up front and centre again.
So there is lots to look forward to!
But in the meantime, Mike Bowers and I will be bidding you adieu, at least for a few weeks. You can find Mr Bowers at @mpbowers and @mikepbowers. And of course, the Guardian brain’s trust will continue to keep you updated with stories in the intervening weeks, so keep an eye on the site for daily updates. Big thank yous all round, especially to you for keeping us company in the first sitting weeks of the Morrison government.
We’ll see you soon - but, as always, take care of you.
Updated
In the wake of the Cathy McGowan apology to the house (see a few posts below) Andrew Leigh was promoting a toolkit for those hoping to better advocate – it’s built around gender advocacy, but can be used for anyone looking to advocate.
You’ll find the toolkit, here.
Updated
Not everyone is embracing the Catholic schools funding deal - this is from a former Liberal state education minister in NSW, turned education academic:
This is pathetic. There is nothing fair about it. There is nothing Christian about it. It’s throwing money at the powerful and well connected. https://t.co/mABGtkU8G9
— Hon Adrian Piccoli (@PiccoliMp) September 20, 2018
Dan Tehan just described the parent income tax that is being used as part of the school funding agreement as the “new Pit” which is its acronym, but given the amount of funding involved, it’s probably not the acronym you want to use.
Updated
Greens senator Mehreen Faruqi moved a motion calling for a national homelessness plan in the Senate – and won with support of Labor (who co-sponsored the motion), Centre Alliance, One Nation, Derryn Hinch and Tim Storer.
The government and Fraser Anning voted against it.
Statement from Faruqi:
The Senate has called out the Coalition government’s failure to commit to a national approach to ending homelessness in Australia. This government has no specific targets to reduce homelessness, despite 100,000 people now without a home. People are sleeping rough with no roof over their head and no bed to sleep in. We need urgent action at all levels of government.
The homelessness services sector has been crying out for national leadership on this issue and it is really disappointing that the Coalition government continue to shirk their responsibilities and have voted against this motion.
The motion:
I give notice that on the next day of sitting, I shall move — that the Senate:
1) Notes:
a) The Coalition government has failed to commit to any specific targets to reduce homelessness
b) Homelessness has risen by 14% and the number of people sleeping rough has risen by an alarming 20% since 2011
c) Homelessness service providers are calling for a national solution to end homelessness
2) Calls on the federal government to develop and implement a well-resourced National Homelessness Strategy that:
a) has specific targets to reduce homelessness;
b) develops and implements approaches, in partnership with States and Territories, to prevent homelessness;
c) develops and implements a framework of continued support for people to break the cycle of homelessness
Updated
From Mike Bowers to you:
A true hero
Updated
The government has again refused to table the religious freedom report:
Government refusing to set free its own report on religious freedom. Says Cabinet hasn’t seen it yet. They’ve had it since May! What have they been doing all this time? 🤔 pic.twitter.com/5B2b4q7M0t
— Kristina Keneally (@KKeneally) September 20, 2018
We know it is because they don’t want it out before the Wentworth byelection, where voters tend to be a bit more socially progressive than the usual Liberal electorate, and also because there are quite a few Liberal MPs who are antsy about the coming debate once it is released.
Christian Porter told Paul Karp the government also wants time to get the legislation in order.
That debate is going to be absolutely toxic.
There were also actual muppets in the parliament today.
Luke Gosling and Milton Dick were ejected for bringing the toys into the chamber.
Everything is totally fine and normal.
Updated
Right, now that I have my head back on straight, just a clarification – the Network Nine story that Tanya Plibersek mentioned in her questions said it was the “member for Banks” who made the Peter Dutton comment – but the story actually references Julia Banks.
It happens quite frequently – that the member for Chisholm’s surname is mixed up with the member for Banks.
So David Coleman made clear it wasn’t him, the Nine story identifies Julia Banks as having made the comment, and the government is totally and completely united and happy to stand behind Peter Dutton.
Got it?
Updated
The Guardian’s Paul Karp just asked Christian Porter why won’t the government release the religious freedom review – because don’t the voters of Wentworth have a right to see it before the byelection?
Porter says it takes time to prepare a response.
The government has had the review since May.
Updated
Cathy McGowan is offering a personal explanation, after she handed a poster to Rebekha Sharkie yesterday in the chamber, encouraging women to get involved in politics – which included the words, don’t get mad, get elected.
She handed it to Sharkie in the chamber, at the same time as a delegation from Saudi Arabia was visiting. She apologises for any offence which may have been inadvertently caused.
The member for Banks, David Coleman, also makes a personal explanation, about the Network Nine report that alleges he said “the last thing I want to do is support this man” (that’s my memory, may not be the exact quote) and that it did not happen.
Tony Burke makes a personal explanation and says Peter Dutton mischaracterised the letter he wrote him (which Dutton said was asking for an intervention in the case of a hate preacher) and says that was not what the letter was about.
Dutton gets up to “clarify” but repeats his claims. Burke calls for him to table the letter to clear it up and Tony Smith tells him he can’t make him.
The parliament moves on.
Updated
Scott Morrison ends our torture and question time ends.
Joel Fitzgibbon to Scott Morrison:
“Can the prime minister confirm that in the last month, the government deposed the democratically elected prime minister for a new prime minister no one voted for, Nationals MPs have been in open revolt against the deputy prime minister because of his failure to deliver an agriculture minister, and women in the government are quitting in disgust and being forced out? Why should Australians pay the price for a government which the prime minister himself has described as the Muppet Show?”
Morrison:
We don’t accept those lies, everything over here is awesome, we are awesome, Labor is not awesome, but thanks for supporting our awesome strawberry laws, something about dust
Updated
Paul Fletcher arrives to kill whatever remains of my vibe to get through this day without screaming.
Jim Chalmers to Scott Morrison - why did you describe your own government as the muppet show?
(which really, is an insult to Kermit and co, who had a great show. One of my all time favourites, in fact)
The chamber erupts and Morrison has to wait for Labor to stop laughing before he can answer:
Morrison:
“The events of about four or five weeks ago I think disappointed Australians greatly in the way that things were conducted in this place. I am honest enough to admit that and tell the Australian people straight about it.
“I did tell this to people straight about.
“But I will tell you what has happened since then. Our party is coming back quickly together, getting on the front foot.
“And I hear the jeers and sneers of the members opposite, but I can tell you, Mr Speaker, the leader of the opposition isn’t looking as certain as he was two weeks ago before we came back to the south, Mr Speaker.
“He has been sitting there in question time today with his cheeky little sneers and they are doing their little stunts, Mr Speaker. I can tell you they are looking under a bit more pressure than they did two weeks ago, Mr Speaker.
“... And you know why? Because they know our government is getting on with things, they know we are getting on with dealing with the issues that concern Australians, like food tampering, Mr Speaker.
“... They know we are focused 100% on them, that we are looking through all of the dust that those opposite want to kick up as they come into this place. Do you know how many questions they have asked me about about drought this week out of their 50 questions to me this week? One, just one question on drought, Mr Speaker.
“They had been more concerned about the politics of Canberra than the beliefs and values that the Australian people are interested in. Our government over five years has been delivering for Australians, whether it is a stronger economy, guaranteeing essential services that Australians rely on, keeping Australians safe and keeping Australians together.
“Now the leader of the opposition is interjecting and I know that the leader of the opposition said he has been responsible for despatching four leaders, Mr Speaker. Two of them were his own, Mr Speaker.
... That is how the leader of the opposition sees this place, he sees it as the game, he sees it as a political game where he gets together with his union thug mates and tries to dispense with leaders for kicks. Well, the Australian people see right through this, Mr Speaker.
Updated
Mood
Updated
Tanya Plibersek to Scott Morrison:
“Is the prime minister aware of a report about the no-confidence motion in the minister for home affairs, which says Nine News has confirmed the member for Banks was overheard telling colleagues that ‘supporting that man is not what I want to be doing’. How can the prime minister continue to protect the minister for home affairs when even his own colleagues have lost confidence in him?
Is this why the prime minister described his own government as the muppet show?”
The question is ruled out of order.
Updated
Dear Beyonce, this is DISMAL today. I think everyone is exhausted.
Bill Shorten to Scott Morrison:
“The prime minister has ridiculed the people who want to know why Malcolm Turnbull is not the prime minister, telling them to ‘get over it’. But how can you expect Australia to get over something that has never been explained to them? Why won’t the prime minister answer this simple question? Why isn’t Malcolm Turnbull still prime minister of Australia?”
Morrison:
“I refer the speaker to the my previous answers. Our government is taking action on the things that mattered to them, whether it is a royal commission into residential aged care, which has been our focus this week, whether it has been taking action on the drought, which has been our focus this week, whether it is resolving the issues and ensuring [funding] on state schools, that has been our focus is week.
What the leader of the opposition has been doing today and all week has just been focusing on the Canberra bubble. He has been sitting over there during question time, sledging away, carrying on like the usual Canberra politician that Australians are sick of.”
Updated
Julie Collins to Ken Wyatt:
“Yesterday in question time, the minister said the funding for ACFI [Aged Care Funding Instrument] funding has continued to increase across all three domains. Can the minister confirm there was actually a cut from the 2017 due to his government’s cuts, according to a report commissioned by uniting care?”
Wyatt:
“Record funding this year, $6.1bn more than Labor provided in its last potential year. The funding for ACFI expenditure has continued to increase across all three domains. All subsidies and supplements per person per year and aged care is $66,000 in 2017/18, compared to 2012/13, with payments increasing every year under this government.
“Complex healthcare payments per person per year up from 2015/16, before the MYEFO and budget changes, on average, $1100 paid per person per year in 2017/18, compared to $18,900.
“In 2016/17, it went to $9,500, this is per person, yes, of course it is. And in 2017/18, it was $19,800. But let me quote from a joint press conference between Prime Minister Gillard and Minister Butler to announce living longer, living better legislation on the 20 April 2012.
“Look, there are some providers who have been unusually claiming levels of money that we do not think they are entitled to.”
After a whole heap of interjections, he decides he has finished his answer.
Updated
As promised – all of Adam Bandt’s speech on why Peter Dutton should be censured by the parliament:
There’s a golden rule in this place if you are a minister: tell the truth. Do not mislead the parliament. The parliament is there to hold ministers and the government to account. We might not like the answers they give. We might disagree with the decisions they’ve made. But, because ministers have enormous power that, in many instances, they exercise behind closed doors, we need them to be honest with us. So one of the most vital questions that we have to resolve now – and before question time, when all the ministers line up and give their answers – is: are any one of these ministers telling the truth? Can we have confidence in what they say?
What has become crystal clear is that, with respect to the minister for home affairs, you cannot trust what he says to this chamber. I asked him a simple question: did he know someone? Did he have a personal connection with someone? He stood up in this chamber, with full knowledge of who I was referring to, and said no. He not only said, ‘I have no personal connection with that person,’ he went on, of his own volition, to say, ‘I did not know them.’ But it is now crystal clear, and the Senate inquiry has confirmed this, when the minister told parliament he didn’t know someone, he did. He did, and that throws everything into question, because now the minister’s credibility is on the line.
The prime minister has laid down some very clear rules for ministers, and those rules say that you have to exercise your power with the sole objective of the public interest and you must not mislead the house. But what we have here is a minister who’s about to get up in a couple of hours, which is why this is so urgent – a minister who, when he knows exactly who it is the question is about, is prepared to say to the house: ‘No, I don’t know them. I have no personal connection with them.’ Then he goes on radio and says, ‘They’re a former colleague of mine.’ Then he comes back later into the house and says that, yes, he did, in fact, know them. Then, not of his own volition, but because the Senate does its job and inquires into the decisions of the minister, several emails popped up. And one email popped up in response to a question from the opposition spokesperson in this house that says, ‘Peter, long time between calls.’ This comes from someone the minister said he didn’t know.
What is also becoming crystal clear is that the department and the minister’s office bent over backwards to help this person, in a way that has not happened with anyone else, with the exception, perhaps, of another au pair. This person got special treatment. Why? The inference is clear: because they were known to the minister. So there are multiple parts of the ministerial standards that the minister has breached.
The prime minister has refused to take the action that’s needed, which is to dismiss the minister. The minister has refused to resign. The best the minister has come up with is a Bill Clinton style defence where ‘personal connection’ apparently doesn’t mean ‘personal connection’. ‘Knowing someone’ apparently does not mean ‘knowing someone’. So he has been caught out, and that is why nothing could be more important than suspending standing orders to deal with this before question time.
... One thing I would say to people who are considering which way to vote on this motion is that this is not about whether or not you agree with the government’s border policy. It is well known that I have a difference of opinion with the minister about that.
This is not about whether you in fact even agree with the decisions that the minister has made. This is about whether ministers in this government can be trusted to tell the truth to the House. I say to the members of the government backbench and to other members in this place that this won’t even affect the numbers in parliament, tightly balanced as they are because the government has decided to leave the people of Wentworth without representation. This won’t even affect the numbers in parliament. This is just a clear message that this minister is no longer fit to sit on the front bench. If the minister is not going to take the course that would be the honourable course, which is what you do when you are in clear breach of the ministerial standards, if he’s not going to take it himself, then parliament needs to send the clearest possible message. And precedent would dictate that, if this suspension motion is passed, and then the ultimate motion is passed, the minister goes to the back bench. For that reason, we must suspend standing orders right now.
Updated
Michael McCormack just snapped his fingers, but unfortunately I am still here.
Tanya Plibersek to Dan Tehan:
Two out of every three children, 2.5 million kids go to a public school. Why is this government continuing to cut $14bn out of public schools over the next decade? And will they guarantee that agreements with state and territories’ public school funding will be signed in the next 14 days as the prime minister promised yesterday?
Tehan:
“Can I just reiterate again, and this comes from someone who attended a public school for part of their public schooling, a state school. So this is something which I take incredibly seriously. Commonwealth funding to state schools was $6.8bn last year.
“It will be $7.3bn this year, it will be $7.9bn next year, and $8.6bn the year after that. Now when it comes to the bilateral negotiations with state and territory governments, as I said last Friday at the education council meeting, I look forward to beginning those negotiations as of now, and I look forward to concluding them as soon as I possibly can, and I have already had very good discussions with New South Wales, very good discussions with the Northern Territory, and I made an offer to Queensland, who I’m sure the shadow minister would know, that I am happy to fly to Brisbane and begin negotiating with her at any time that she would like as well.”
Again – it is possible for both arguments to be right, and in this case, they are – yes, it is record funding, and yes, it is going up. An increasing population means it will ALWAYS be record funding. But it is not going up by as much as was anticipated, given the funding changes the 2014 budget made to health and education funding.
Updated
I do not have the energy to even sass any of these dixers today. Dear me, they are a scourge on our democracy. The sooner they are gone, and we actually get proper questions without notice, the better.
Tanya Plibersek to Dan Tehan:
The Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government has denied that it is cutting school funding. Today, the prime minister stood up and admitted it cut funding to Catholic and independent schools and pledged to restore some of that funding. Will the prime minister and the education minister also restore the $14bn that has been cut from public schools?
Tehan:
“I thank the shadow minister for her question. And it gives me the chance to inform the house that when it comes to government schools, they are getting record funding levels.
When it comes to Catholic schools, they are getting record funding levels, when it comes independent schools, they are getting record funding levels. And it also gives me the chance just to mention to the house what that funding looks like.
Commonwealth funding for state schools was $6.8bn last year, $6.8bn last year. It will be $7.3bn this year, it will be at $7.9bn next year, and $8.6bn the year after that. I think that is going up.
As a matter of fact, it is quite interesting, from 2017 to 2027, commonwealth funding to state schools will grow by 86%. According to the productivity commission, since 2006, on a per student basis, commonwealth funding to state schools has increased by a 78.5%.
But this is an incredibly important point is, this is compared to 7.7% increase in the contribution from the state and territory governments. So if we need to be encouraging anyone to increase their funding for state schools, it is state and territory governments.
Updated
The strawberry laws have passed the Senate – Australian Berry Force is go.
By the way – the legislation is not retrospective. So if they catch who is responsible for kickstarting this crisis, none of the legislation changes will apply to them.
Updated
Adam Bandt says the Greens will not be giving up, when it comes to Peter Dutton:
The government has used its numbers to run a protection racket for Peter Dutton.
“Peter Dutton is now hanging by the barest of threads. Soon his position may be untenable.
“The facts haven’t changed. It is clear Peter Dutton has misled the parliament and he needs to face the consequences.
“Shamefully, the PM has now given a green light to all his ministers to mislead parliament.
“There was only one vote in it and that vote was Peter Dutton himself.
“This is not over. The motion is still on the notice paper and we will continue to pursue the minister over this issue up until the next election.”
Updated
Bill Shorten to Peter Dutton:
I miss the beginning of this question, but it involves members of the Australian Defence Force, who have come to parliament to lobby for their translators to be given visas, saying they wore Australian uniforms and served Australia, but have been unable to get a meeting with the minister – and yet, the two au pairs were granted special attention.
Dutton:
“The reality is Mr Speaker, is that this government has granted many hundreds of visas to people who have helped [our defence force] almost 1000 for people who have served in Afghanistan and Iraq.
There are many examples that we have been able to help and we have been able to settle here.
Mr Speaker, I have not intervened in cases where there is advice to me, not advice that I can go into publicly, but advice that has been received from the intelligence agencies, in relation to [the cases of particular] individuals.
I will not act against the national interest or the national security interests of this country. My officers met with Mr Scanes, and I haven’t it with them, but we have made it clear in relation to this particular case, and I don’t know whether the leader of theopposition has sought any sort of briefing on this matter – I do know that the opposition has received everything before this has been raised in this place, but there are always threats to our country ...
“Mr Speaker, I assume that the leader of the opposition has not had such a briefing. I’m happy to arrange that everything be provided with as much information as possible. I can assure you that the government is in particular through the advice of the ADF and some of our international partners’ [attempts] to settle people who are worthy of the support our country.
But to finish on this note, there are some cases where I receive advice from the intelligence agencies. In those cases, acting in the national interest of our country, I wouldn’t not give that visa.”
Updated
Mark Dreyfus to Scott Morrison:
“Can you confirm that it has been revealed that the minister for home affairs intervened in the matters of two au pairs and misled the parliament on whether he knew one of the employers of the au pairs, participated in parliamentary discussions about childcare when he had an interest in child-care centres, and that there are doubts as to whether or not he can be a member of this parliament? Why is the prime minister to support the minister for home affairs?”
Morrison:
“I’ll tell you why I am continuing to support the minister for home affairs. That is the question. Because he is doing a fantastic job. That is why. I’m asked about interventions that he made.
“It may interest the house that during his time as minister, the minister when he had responsibility for these matters, or exercised ministerial intervention power in 116 visas.
“In just two financial years between July 2011 and June 2013, the member for McMahon, when he was the minister intervened over 23,000 times.
“Over 23,000 times. 23,000 times. You ... would need a lot of paper to go through those 23,000 occasions, Mr Speaker, but there is a number that is bigger than 23,000 interventions the member for McMahon [made] and that is the 35,000 people who turned up on illegal boats on his watch, Mr Speaker.
“That is his form. That is their form, Mr Speaker. The other reason that I support the minister for home affairs is because together he and I commend the decisions we took as minister for immigration, and when he was Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, and Minister for home affairs, we cancelled 3763 visas of non citizens who committed crimes. 694 convicted criminals. 250 child sex offenders. 193 for violent offences, 194 for outlaw motorcycle gang members.
“We cancelled the visas of people like Alex Vella, who was head of the rebels motorcycle gang.
“When I became the minister for immigration, they were quick to tell me in the police force this was a person who should not be in Australia.
“And I was happy to act on that. The Labor party sat and did nothing. And did nothing. As the visa was renewed, they sat on their hands, because when it comes to border protection, the Labor party are more interested in protecting Australian from au pairs than they are from protecting Australia from violent criminals.”
Sidenote: I don’t think anyone is suggesting Australia be protected from au pairs, but that Peter Dutton gave special attention to these cases, where a personal connection to himself, or senior members of his office, has been suggested.
Updated
Labor education spokeswoman Tanya Plibersek said the schools funding deal “looks desperate”, like the government is just trying “to take an issue off the table”.
But she also insists it “absolutely not” a better deal or adequate funding, even for Catholic and independent schools.
The restoration of $4.6bn over 10 years to Catholic and independent schools amounts to an admission that Gonski 2.0 did cut funding from schools, but she says 5 million parents of public school children have a right to ask: “What about my child?”
Restoring some funding is “inadequate” compared to Labor’s offering of $17bn over 10 years, including $14bn for public schools.
Updated
Shayne Neumann to Peter Dutton: (this may be the first time Neumann has kicked off the opposition questioning, to my memory)
“I refer to an email from the duty inspector in strategic command in relation to the French au pair, stating your relation to the interventions admission and I quote, ‘the ABF does not agree with the content or think it appropriate that the minister intervened’. Why is this the sort of incident where the minister rushes into intervening?”
Dutton: (after publicly thanking and commending Senior Constable Stephanie Bochorsky)
“I have said to this house and outside of this house before that I look at each case on its merit. Now, the honourable member made his own judgement in relation to a case that he presented to me, asking me to consider the matter. He was asking for a convicted murderer, for someone who had a very extensive criminal history. He was saying to me that he would like to see a better outcome for that individual.
“We can go to the Member for Watson who was advocating for a hate preacher, I can point out, Mr Speaker, members of the house on both sides who have come to me over a long period of time asking me to act.
“I can tell you what I had done, Mr Speaker, I have cancelled 3700 visas of criminals in this country, people who would have gone on to commit offences against Australians! I have cancelled the visas of 94 outlaw motorcycle gang members, members who are involved in the distribution of ...”
(Tony Burke asks about relevance)
Dutton:
“Well, Mr Speaker, I was asked about that particular case. I said I dealt with that case on its merit, that is it.
“Now something has been made of the fact that I dealt with this case in a matter of hours, I’ve dealt with many cases a matter of hours. Kids are sick, where the department has advised me that somebody should be deported because their tourist visa had come to an end or their visa had come to an end, grandparent that has been ripped off, a person that wanted to go overseas for a funeral. I have looked at each of those cases on their merit, Mr Speaker, and I had made decisions based on the merit of each case. I am very happy to have my record compared to some of these opposite, you were involved in the immigration portfolio in the great years of the Rudd-Gillard period of government, Mr Speaker. I will have my record compared to theirs any day of the week.
Updated
Question time begins
This day is just motoring by!
The parliament pauses for a moment to honour the inaugural winner of the national police bravery award – Senior Constable Stephanie Bochorsky, who rushed into a neighbour’s home in Perth in 2015 to rescue two sisters, aged three and seven, after hearing their mother’s screams for help.
The parliament took a moment to applaud her.
Scott Morrison:
“I would like to add my sincere congratulations on behalf of the house and particularly the government members of the house to the senior constable for her incredible bravery, and I am so pleased it has been recognised in the way it has in this award.
I also want to thank you as there are others in this chamber who are the children of police officers, as I am, and we know the sacrifices that police officers make every single day and we understand the impact that has on families of police officers, and when you take those risks, we know when you take them, there are so many other things pressing on around you.
The night, it was some nights ago, of course, Stephanie heard screams from a neighbour’s home.
Although she was off duty, she rushed into that home and found the child alight, on fire. Another had been doused in petrol, it is unimaginable. The children were four and seven years of age.
That is enough to take in, just at that. Stephanie fought off the man that, hard to describe him as one, who was the children’s father, removed the children from the house, and cared for the family.
None of us can really comprehend the terror and evil of that night, and of course, our thoughts and prayers are with the children this day. But it said a lot about what Stephanie believes her service is about, and they know is what police officers, and not just police officers, those who work in our paramedics and ambulance services, my brother is a paramedic, those who work in our fire services and emergency services, they all have a similar culture.
She said, I took an oath to serve and protect the community on or off duty, uniform or not, 24/7. Everyone in this chamber has sworn an oath, you have given us an incredible lesson about how to live up to them.
Bill Shorten:
I thank the prime minister for his heartfelt words, I would like to say on behalf of the opposition to Senior Constable Stephanie Borchorsky, you honour us by your presence today.
I congratulate you on your award. It was an inaugural award as presented to the Police Federation of Australia, the award made by your peers, the respect of your peers, and I know you value that very much.
The prime minister has just detailed maps of Stephanie’s extraordinary story, one moment relaxing in front of the television at home on Friday night.
Suddenly, still in your pyjamas and your socks, sprinting across the street and into harm’s way, answering a call for help, finding yourself in the midst of violence and cruelty which is impossible to contemplate or comprehend as a parent, is the 4-year-old girl clinging to the bars of her cot, already in flames.
Her father pouring petrol on her sister’s face. If it was not for you, Senior Constable, confronting the perpetrator, carrying both children from the house, prying the arms of the youngest one from around your neck to soak in the cold water of your own bath at home, both of those girls would not be alive today, it is as simple as that.
Stephanie, yesterday I asked you the question, I assume you have heard a thousand thousand times by now. How did you do it? You replied, as so many modest heroes to it by saying, I think anyone would have acted in the same way in that situation.
Mr Speaker, we all hope that we would, we all hope that we will do, but I think in our hearts, we wonder if we could. Stephanie, you did. The other thing you said to me yesterday that really struck me is you said that the rescue was the easy part, it was what came after that that was difficult.
Your memories of the night, the scene set into your mind, the ongoing contact with those poor kids. Those wakeful moments of reflection, but you have to ask yourself.
The question that you have to ask yourself is how could anyone do that to a child, how could any parent do that to a child? I’m not sure there is an easy way back from that and what you have seen.
I do not think there is a quick way to put those things out of your mind. Our police officers, our emergency services personnel, they are jobs that follow you home. Whether you are in uniform or out of uniform, you always wear what you have seen.
But in part, your off-duty awareness is the reason why these two little children are alive, but I think you remind us that there is a much we can do to improve the way we support people who serve our community in the way that you do.
Senior Constable Bochorsky, two precious little girls owe you their lives, Australia owes you its thanks, and this house owes you a debt of gratitude because you remind us of what is really important.
Updated
Just for those who missed it – Ben Morton was technically paired.
Updated
The official statement on the schools funding announcement has been released:
Australian families will have choice and equity in education as the Morrison government guarantees funding to the non-government school sector.
The Australian government has accepted all the recommendations of the National School Resourcing Board’s Review of the socio-economic status score, released in July. The new method for calculating school funding will make the education system fairer and more equitable.
Commonwealth funding for non-government schools will be linked to parental income from 2020 using improved data collection and analysis that will ensure non-government school funding is targeted at the students who need it most.
A vibrant, fairly funded non-government school sector ensures parents retain the choice of where to send their kids to school. The non-government system provides an alternative which improves standards and competition across the board, while also alleviating pressure on the state system.
The federal government is providing a record $309.6bn in recurrent funding to all Australian schools from 2018 to 2029. The government remains committed to sector blind needs based funding arrangements and will provide an additional $3.2bn over 10 years to non-government schools identified as needing the most help from 2020 to 2029, with an additional $170.8m available in 2019 to give funding certainty.
A further $1.2bn will be provided for a new fund to address specific challenges in the non-government school sector, such as supporting schools in drought-affected areas, schools that need help to improve performance and to deliver choice in communities.
The government appreciates the constructive way the non-government sector has worked together to deliver these important reforms.
Updated
Update: There was another technical pair.
On the numbers for that suspended standing orders vote, we have been trying to get to the bottom of what happened.
Rebehka Sharkie and Cathy McGowan voted with Labor and Adam Bandt and Andrew Wilkie to get them to 67.
Bob Katter voted with the government – which got them to 68.
Which, as someone else also looking at this points out, if Katter had switched sides, the government would have lost (that particular) vote
There were six pairs, I am told. But there are seven Coalition members who didn’t vote.
Warren Entsch and Alex Hawke are away, and were paired and Labor asked for four pairs, so Chris Crewther, Steve Irons, Sussan Ley and Andrew Wallace sat in the advisor’s box.
Ben Morton was absent - but seems like it was a technical error - he should have been paired, but his absence was known.
Updated
The simplest way to conceptualise that press conference is: Catholics and independents weren’t happy – so here’s a fist full of dollars.
The specifics are:
- $170.8m in 2019 of interim funding – this is for a number of fixes, including rolling over the system-weighted average and guaranteeing 3% growth for independent schools;
- $3.2bn from 2020 to 2029 to Catholic and independent schools, to transition to a new measure of parents’ capacity to contribute that uses direct measures of their income rather than the vaguer socio-economic status score;
- $1.2bn from 2020 to 2029 for a flexible “school choice” fund – which Dan Tehan described as “sector blind” but public schools CANNOT apply for. Instead, it’s for government priorities like diversity (keeping Catholic schools open) and specific issues such as regional, rural and remote education.
Morrison said that of the $4.5bn more in spending over the decade, $1.1bn will be in the next four years. That sum will be “reconciled” in the mid-year economic and fiscal outlook in mid December, but did not promise to find offsets to pay for the spending.
Instead, he pointed to improving revenue estimates due to improvements in business tax.
Updated
It looks like large swathes of parliament house are without internet at the moment, so people are actually having to call each other old school – Tanya Plibersek will be responding to the Catholic schools funding announcement in the opposition courtyard at 1.45.
Updated
Not every backbencher was happy with having to support Peter Dutton in the vote Adam Bandt brought on, in an attempt to move a no-confidence motion against the home affairs minister, as that question in the press conference highlighted.
And some were very happy to support him.
I have no intel on who is who, but I think you could probably guess which side parts of the backbench fell into.
Updated
In response to Katharine Murphy’s question following up her story on the AMA calling on the government to move families on Nauru to the Australian mainland, where they can be properly treated and monitored by doctors – the question being, will you heed their calls – Scott Morrison says:
“We are getting families off Nauru. That’s what we’re doing. That’s why we have the arrangement with the United States and that’s why we’re pursuing that. We thank our partners in the US with the way we are able to progress with that.
You know my views about this – I’m not going to put at risk any element of Australia’s border protection policy because I know when you do that, which is what Labor did last time, thinking it would have no effect, 1,200 people died. So I’m not going to do that.”
Updated
Brett Mason from SBS asks: ‘Prime Minister, in March, Peter Dutton told the parliament, ‘I don’t know these people’ in relation to the au pair issue. The evidence presented to the inquiry shows very clearly that he did. Your minister misled the parliament, didn’t he?”
And Scott Morrison wraps up the press conference VERY quickly:
“No, I don’t accept that at all and neither does he and the parliament doesn’t take that view as well. Thanks very much. Thank you.”
Updated
Asked by another reporter (I missed who) about the vote to suspend standing orders for a no-confidence motion against Peter Dutton, where he says “one of your backbenchers said to another – supporting that man goes against what I want to do. Does this not show that you don’t have the unity in the government in the party you were seeking?”
Scott Morrison responds:
I think that’s nonsense. The Labor party have been kicking up a lot of dust this week about votes and how it’s all going to go. And on each and every occasion, our team has stood fast in the Parliament.
So what it has shown today is frankly Labor are just full of a lot of hot air. They trumped up a partisan base committee report in the Senate which I said this morning if that same committee used its numbers to say the sun didn’t come up this morning, well, that wouldn’t make that true either.
The parliament has dealt with this matter now and it continues to deal with the matter. I think it’s time for the Labor party to move on from their games and the Greens to move on from their games and the government is focused 100% on the needs of the Australian people and this week a royal commission into the aged care sector.
This week – dealing very quickly with the issues of alarm that has been happening in our farming community whether it’s with strawberries or with whether it’s drought today to ensure you can get the hay to the farmers.
We are here again demonstrating that we are focused on the needs of Australian parents and students.
So that’s what the government’s been doing this week. The Labor party and the Greens and others have just been playing the usual Canberra games, and when politicians play Canberra games and when others play Canberra games, now know what the Australian people do – they’re turning down the sound.
They’re turning it down on Labor and the Greens and turning it up on our government because our government is focused on what they’re interested in.
Updated
Asked if this proves that if you lobby hard enough you can get whatever you want from the government, Scott Morrison says to Fairfax reporter Michael Koziol:
“Well, I am not surprised you have a very cynical view about this, but I don’t think parents will be cynical like that. They will know that we’re funding public schools at record levels. And all parents want to have choices about how they educate their children. And where there are issues that need to be addressed, we’ll address them.
“State governments are the principal funders of state schools. The Commonwealth government has always been the principal funder of non-government Schools. That’s not news, that’s a longstanding arrangements. We stepped up on public schools and non-government schools.
We believe in choice in education. We believe Australian parents should have choice. And we’re guaranteeing that choice through the decisions and the commitments and the agreements we reached today.”
Government strikes funding deal with Catholic schools
Scott Morrison and Dan Tehan have announced a new funding deal for Catholic schools, after months of discontent from the non-government school sector, which led to conflict between the Catholic sector and the government – which included the sector lobbying against the government in byelections.
Morrison:
From 2020, the Commonwealth will transition to a new method of calculating how non-state schools are funded and that will make the education system fairer and more equitable.
The updated calculation was recommended by the National School Resourcing Board and its review on how the non-state school sector is funded. To support schools during the transition, the commonwealth government will provide over the medium term – $3.2bn to support students, parents and teachers of non-state schools.
For students, this will mean the opportunity to get the best results from school. The parents, it will mean that choice remains affordable.
An affordable choice in government non-schools. For teachers, it will mean certainty of funding so they can get on with the job.
In addition to this funding, arrangements for 2019 will allow schools to plan with confidence for their 2019 school year.
... It will support diversity in the schooling system with a new $1.2bn fund over the medium term that will provide a flexible means of targets extra support for those schools in the non-government sector that require the extra support. Such as schools, I should stress, in rural and regional and remote locations, schools in drought-affected areas or underperforming schools and I particularly want to welcome the offer by the national Catholic education commission and archbishop fisher to do all they can to provide relief for students from families in drought-affected areas where they’re attending school which has been a key part of our discussions.
Of course remain committed to the state school system. We are delivering record levels of additional recurrent funding for government schools growing from $7.3 billion this year to 13.7 billion in 2029.
I want to thank the national Catholic education commission who are issuing a statement today where they make it very plain that the National Catholic Education Commission fully supports the package of measures unveiled today.
And I welcome also the correspondence from the independent schools council of Australia where they say the proposal for the phased introduction of a new model for calculating government funding for non-government schools creates a foundation for a fair and reasonable resolution of the current funding issues it has our full support.
Updated
In news which I am sure will send a shockwave through our democracy, the Senate has run out of time to debate Pauline Hanson’s ‘it’s ok to be white’ motion.
The earliest the Senate can get to it now, is in the October session.
#thoughtsandprayers
Andrew Wilkie’s speech in full:
Central to the Minister for Home Affairs defence is that he receives hundreds of requests from members of parliament and from senators to intervene in individual cases, and that’s all he did in the case of the two or three au pairs.
What he misses when he gives that defence is the fact that those hundreds of requests for intervention are genuinely for people on humanitarian grounds.
There is no way in the world that the Minister for Home Affairs can lean on the defence that the intervention in the case of the au pairs was on humanitarian grounds.
That is patently bunkum. And how offensive is that to all of those who care about the people who are locked up in our overseas gulags on Manus Island and Nauru? How offensive is that?
How wrong is it for the manager of government business to defend the Minister for Home Affairs by saying, he’s kept us safe, and we don’t want to keep us safe.
Of course we want to keep us safe, but we also want to act like a legal country, with integrity.
It is outrageous that there have been countless children now who have been desperately sick and the Minister for Home Affairs has refused to have them brought to Australia, and its been left to the federal court to issue orders to bring those people to Australia.
On one hand, it’s OK to be intervening on humanitarian grounds for au
pairs to come to this country but not OK for the minister to intervene in numerous cases.
For example, just this year the federal court issued transport orders for a 10-year-old boy on Nauru who attempted suicide three times and needed surgery.
The federal court had to order the repatriation to Australia of a young girl who attempted suicide three times on Nauru.
The federal court had to intervene in the case of a 14-year-old girl who doused herself in petrol and set herself alight on Nauru.
The federal court had to intervene in the case of a 17-year-old boy who suffers from psychosis and needed to be reunited with his mother.
The federal court had to intervene in the case of an adolescent girl suffering major depression and traumatic withdrawal syndrome.
The federal court had to intervene in the case of a critically unwell baby.
The federal court had to intervene in the case of a 12-year-old boy on Nauru refusing fluid and food for nearly two weeks.
The federal court had to intervene in the case of a 17-year-old girl on Nauru refusing all food and fluid and diagnosed with resignation syndrome.
The federal court had to intervene in the case of a 12-year-old girl on Nauru who has attempted suicide several times, also setting herself on fire.
The federal court had to intervene in the case of a 14-year-old boy on Nauru, suffering major depressive disorder and severe muscle wastage after not getting out of bed for four months.
But the minister says it’s OK to intervene in the case of two or three au pairs on humanitarian grounds when we’ve got at least 30 children on Nauru who doctors say should be brought to this country for urgent medical attention.
Then there’s the case of all the people on Manus who are effectively detained there.
It is a complete nonsense.
It’s deeply offensive to all of us in this parliament when we’re accused of being weak on national security.
We’re strong on national security but we’re also humanitarians.
When we go to the minister and ask him to intervene, it’s for genuine humanitarian grounds, because we believe we should start acting like a law-abiding country, with integrity.
Updated
Scott Morrison has called a press conference in the prime minister’s courtyard – the FANCIEST and most serious of the press conference locations – and it’s with education minister Dan Tehan.
Looks like the solution to the Catholic schools funding issue has just become clear.
Updated
Further to Andrew Wilkie’s speech on why the motion should have been supported (which I am working on bringing you), it might be worth having a look at this story from Katharine Murphy, if you haven’t already:
The president of the Australian Medical Association has urged Scott Morrisonto take urgent action to remove families and children from Nauru, preferably to the Australian mainland, to safeguard their physical and mental health.
In a letter to Morrison from Dr Tony Bartone, seen by Guardian Australia, the AMA president says the medical profession is “demanding a change of policy” in recognition that the situation on Nauru is now “a humanitarian emergency requiring urgent intervention”.
As well as urging the new prime minister to change the policy he presided over as a former immigration minister, the AMA president has asked Morrison to facilitate access to Nauru for a delegation of Australian doctors to assess the health and wellbeing of people in detention.
Peter Dutton avoids no-confidence motion by one vote
You could suggest that Peter Dutton just saved Peter Dutton from a potentially very humiliating exercise.
Updated
The motion to suspend standing orders fails by one:
Ayes: 67
Noes: 68
Just a reminder – this particular motion is just to suspend standing orders in order to be able to debate the no confidence motion.
Updated
Tony Burke says Labor will support the motion – and says it just comes down to what Peter Dutton said, when he answered Adam Bandt’s question about whether or not he had any personal connection to anyone involved in the cases, and it was a simple open and close case that he misled the parliament when he answered no.
Andrew Wilkie is now listing all the cases where the federal court had to intervene on cases in Nauru, where children were diagnosed as needing “urgent medical attention” by doctors, requiring being taken to Australia, because the minister would not act.
“There is no integrity for misleading the parliament, there is no integrity in bringing nannies into this country on humanitarian reasons, for a mate once or twice removed,” he says.
The division has been called.
Updated
Meanwhile, I forgot to show you the big truck Scott Morrison got to play in today:
And also the prime minister looking at things:
Big trucks are a big mood, apparently.
Updated
“There has not been one shred of credible evidence presented by the Labor party or the Greens,” Christopher Pyne says, to suggest Peter Dutton had misled parliament.
He says the Liberal party never moved a motion of no confidence in the Julia Gillard government.
The parliament is now fighting over what role the Greens played in the “instability” we have seen over the past decade.
Wait – no, now they are laughing because Pyne just referred to Dutton as being “beyond reproach”.
.@AdamBandt has moved a motion of no confidence in @PeterDutton_MP as scrutiny ramps up over the Minister's intervention in au pair cases.
— Sky News Australia (@SkyNewsAust) September 20, 2018
MORE: https://t.co/3SUAVjLSCu #SkyLiveNow pic.twitter.com/RsGoLgNgt0
Updated
There has been no indication anyone from the government benches is even thinking about crossing the floor, even for a second.
Which tells you – the numbers are not here for the motion.
Updated
Christopher Pyne isn’t exactly doing a rousing job of defending Peter Dutton, instead arguing that the parliament has too much important work to do to suspend the standing orders.
Quite a few minutes in, he gets to the “absolute” confidence the government has in the home affairs minister. But it’s the tail end of the speech, not the crux.
Updated
“He has been caught out, he has been caught out, which is why nothing can be more important to suspend standing orders, before question time,” Adam Bandt says.
“The one thing I would say to people who are considering which way to vote on this; this is not about whether you agree with the government’s border policy ... this is not about whether you agree with the decisions [that] have been made ... this is about whether you can trust the ministers in place.”
Adam Bandt says the motion does nothing to change the numbers in the house, but is about whether or not Peter Dutton is fit to sit on the frontbench.
Andrew Wilkie seconds the motion to suspend standing orders – which is the precursor to any no-confidence motion – but Christopher Pyne, of course, says the government does not support the motion, as it has “important work to do”.
Updated
No confidence motion attempted against Peter Dutton
“... In respect to the minister for home affairs you can not trust what he says,” says Adam Bandt.
He says when Dutton answered his question about whether he had any personal connection with the au pair family, he said no – but later admitted it was a former colleague.
“What is also becoming crystal clear is the department and the minister’s office bent over backwards to help this person, in a way that has not happened for anyone else, anyone else, except with the exception of another au pair.”
Updated
Adam Bandt is in the House attempting to move the no confidence motion against Peter Dutton
Rachel Siewart had a bit to say in a statement about the tiny, tiny, indexation increase to Newstart:
I’m astounded that the government thought that Newstart rising through indexation by $2.20 – or about 30c a day – to $275.10 a week will make a difference to people trying to survive on Newstart.
It’s not news that the government is out of touch with the community and their cost-of-living struggles. But saying that a $2 increase to Newstart is going to “help people keep up with cost of living” is a new low; you would think it was a joke if this issue wasn’t so serious.
How can they not be embarrassed by their ignorant comments? People are living on $38 dollars a day for a long time and the best the government can do is let Newstart increase by indexation?
Just this week, Deloitte Access economics has released research showing that an increase to Newstart by $75 a week would have a boost to the Australian economy by $4.0 billion as a result of extra spending.
It’s shameful that in a wealthy country like Australia we have so many people living in poverty simply due to government inaction.
The Greens have a bill before parliament right now that would increase Newstart and Youth Allowance by $75 a week. Newstart could have a $75 a week increase by the end of October.
And again, I can recommend you check out the Guardian’s Life on the Breadline series, where people forced to live on benefits, talk about their lives.
Updated
It didn’t get a lot of attention yesterday, because the Peter Dutton report was tabled at around the same time, but the Future of Work and Workers report was presented to the Senate yesterday.
Murray Watt:
This was a very big topic that undertook a very long inquiry, and it covers some really important issues facing our country, such as what the impact of robots, automation, artificial intelligence is going to be on workers. We know that some jobs will be created, we know that there are some jobs at risk, and we also know – as a result of this inquiry – that we have a government that has no plan whatsoever to deal with the change that is coming to Australian workplaces. We already know that Australians are suffering from some of the lowest wage growth that we’ve ever seen. We’ve got more and more people working as casuals, labour hire and in non-standard work, and we have a government that’s just sitting on the sidelines letting all of this happen to Australian people and not taking action. This report highlights that we need a national plan. Hope is not a strategy. Hope is not going to get us there. We need a government that’s prepared to work with business, with unions and educational institutions to make sure that Australian workers do have a bright future and we think that that is possible.
Updated
Punters have updated their stakes on who will win Dickson, with Sportsbet offering odds of $1.72 for Labor’s Ali France to take the seat from Peter Dutton ($2.10), if you put any stock in this sort of thing.
Updated
When it's sort of OK to break the law (ish)
Peter Dutton, the home affairs minister, had his weekly spot on Sydney’s 2GB radio with Ray Hadley earlier this morning.
They talked about the strawberry contamination scare, the au pair cases, and a few other things.
Au pairs:
Hadley, interestingly, admitted that he didn’t see the harm in breaking the law to pay some tourists a few dollars to babysit some kids, and Dutton appeared to agree with him.
Hadley began the conversation by saying he felt “compromised”.
He said he’d seen a Sky News story revealing some of the texts that had been sent and received by the Italian au pair, which made it clear that she had agreed to do some babysitting for cash in violation of her visa.
Hadley said he couldn’t see the harm.
“I know that these people come here as tourists, but if there’s a young person in my area and someone said ‘Oh, she babysat my kids a month ago and she’s a really good person’ or ‘I know that person and she is here on a tourist visa and I may be acting illegally’, but I couldn’t see the harm in saying ‘Look, I’ll give you $10, $15, $20 an hour to look after my kids, you know, for a couple of hours if you don’t mind’.”
He then continued.
“I know strictly in the way the law’s laid down that that would be contravening the tourist visa, but are we really going to hunt down young people who come here on a holiday and might, because they babysit someone’s kids for a couple of hours, throw them out of the country?”
Dutton appeared to agree with him, saying common sense needed to be applied.
“I think it’s an application of common sense, Ray,” Dutton said, “and people that have lived in the real world get it.
“The Greens, of course, don’t live in the real world and don’t get it.
“I had put the ‘no work’ requirement in the undertaking that these two women had to sign, they had no criminal history, they didn’t overstate their visas and I’m being lectured to members of the Labor party and Greens who support hate preachers coming into our country, who give references to crooks and criminals.
“Mr [Shayne] Neumann, my opposite number, who would be Bill Shorten’s home affairs minister, supporting a convicted murderer, wanting his visa sorted out, all the rest of it.
“So it’s galling, really, to take a morals lecture from some of these people.
“As you say, I just think it’s a common sense application and people can draw their own conclusions, make their own judgments but, I’ve not had one thing that I’ve said contradicted. Everything I’ve said in the parliament, outside, has not been doubted, hasn’t been proven wrong, and in all of this inquiry they were hoping for a smoking gun, hoping Mr [Roman] Quaedvlieg was actually telling the truth, in the end none of that proved to be true.”
Senate inquiry into the au pair case:
They also talked about the Senate report into the au pair scandal.
Dutton said he wasn’t surprised that the report, which was written by a committee dominated by Labor and Greens senators, had found against him.
“Well Sarah Hanson-Young and Nick McKim and the other Greens, will they say something nice about me?” he asked.
He and Hadley then chuckled together.
Dutton said the au pair scandal, and the short Senate inquiry, had been a “political stunt from the start”. He said the former border force chief Roman Quaedvlieg “went down in flames”.
Hadley then had a go at Quaedvlieg, saying “I think, at best, he’s a discredited witness” and said even Fairfax Media had distanced itself from Quaedvlieg now.
Dutton agreed.
Strawberries:
Dutton said Scott Morrison needed to move quickly on the food contamination scare, so his announcement yesterday was welcome.
He said the law had to change to act as a deterrent to copycats.
“It’s a necessary change to the law, it toughens it up, and it sends a very clear message from the government,” he said.
Updated
Jennifer Westacott delivered the Alvert Street lecture, and the Business Council head urged her audience to embrace inclusion:
I want an Australia where you are not denied opportunities because you choose to live in regional areas like Shepparton, Busselton or Toowoomba.
But to ensure our regions can thrive and retain their brightest people, we need to coordinate infrastructure in these areas outside metropolitan Australia, drive investment, and drive skills investment development.
And mostly, I want you to live in an Australia that is united, not divided.
One country.
The divisions that exist, not too far from the surface, must end.
The division between the regions and cities, the division between small and big businesses, and the division between religions.
We must call out those on the extreme, devoid of goodwill, who seek to isolate one ethnic group from the rest, and those who attempt to fan division by seeking to resurrect the archaic notion of classes.
After all, Robert Menzies long ago observed that:
“In a country like Australia the class war must always be a false war.’’
I want you to live in a country with one society shared by all its citizens -– whether you are a refugee, the grandchild of post-war migrants, an Indigenous Australian or the descendants of First Fleeters.
One country where we all belong.
A country that values inclusion, equality, tolerance and diversity.
A country that embraces freedom, the rule of law, and fairness through opportunity.
As we endeavour to leave you this nation, we need to remember it will not all be plain sailing.
It hasn’t been for my generation, and it won’t be for yours.
Just as they are tailwinds, there are also headwinds.”
Updated
Louise Pratt, who headed up the Senate inquiry which found Peter Dutton misled the parliament, told the ABC why she believes why he should be censured:
Given the evidence that the inquiry has found, I would call on the crossbenchers to do the same. People with personal relationships that are able to call the minister’s office and get that high-level of personal service –the kind of service that we saw these cases get was absolutely extraordinary.
It involved the minister making sure that he could sign an intervention before he left the country, instead of passing that intervention over to minister Keenan, who would otherwise have been responsible for it.
Why did he do that? Well, probably because this intervention didn’t go through the normal departmental processes. It came through his office. The standard departmental processes would have meant that these cases had gone through the department, that you send an email with your ministerial intervention request to the department.
On the other hand, what we found in this case is at the border Australian Border Force recommended in both of these cases that these people be deported. That is not a standard ministerial intervention request. The only reason this ministerial intervention request came forward was because the minister’s office themselves put that request forward.
Normally those requests come through migration agents and have to go through the department. In part, that was because the paperwork that the department provided was completely inadequate.
For example, ministerial interventions are tabled ... in the parliament. We matched up those tabled documents with the ones that the department gave us in the course of the inquiry.
And the dates and the numbers of interventions simply didn’t match. So, it’s very, very hard for us to draw conclusive evidence about whether this is the limit of the number of interventions the minister has made through his personal connections.
We’ve gone back through as many of those as possible. To try and match them up. But it doesn’t give us much confidence in those processes. It’s very difficult for us to take it further because the inquiry has closed. It is up to the Senate, what it would seek to do in terms of making further inquiries on the matter.
Updated
Labor is on board with the strawberry laws – but wants a review built in after 12 months.
Mark Dreyfus sent this letter to Christian Porter:
I and the opposition were provided with a draft of the criminal code amendment (food contamination) bill 2018 at 6.02pm on 19 September 2018.
As you will know from the speech I have just delivered in the House, the opposition will be supporting this legislation.
As I indicated in my speech, the opposition seeks an amendment to the bill to provide for a statutory review of the provisions introduced by the bill within 12 months of their commencement.
This is to ensure that any unintended consequences (which often occur with legislation as rushed as this has been) are able to be identified and dealt with.
The opposition is prepared to work with you to ensure that any procedural steps needed to support this amendment are expedited.
Updated
The Senate passed that motion asking for the religious freedoms review to be tabled.
Derryn Hinch, Centre Alliance, the Greens and Labor voted for, while One Nation, Fraser Anning and Cory Bernardi voted against it.
After Anning tried, and failed, to get the outrage he wanted with another ridiculous adjournment speech on Tuesday night, this time on Safe Schools, Hanson is attempting to crank it up with a motion which basically says “it’s OK to be white”, later today.
We all deal with RDS in our own way, I guess.
Updated
Bill Shorten just told the parliament to buy a “punnet for yourself and a punnet for the nation” as the Australian Berry Force laws go through the House.
Updated
The Senate passed a motion yesterday demanding the government produce the Ruddock religious freedom report.
Late yesterday, the government responded with the Senate version of “yeah, nah” by saying it was confidential.
Which it is. Right until after the Wentworth byelection is over.
But now Labor and the Greens are yeah, nah, but yeahing the government, by passing another motion demanding the government table it.
1. Notes the claim of public interest immunity in response to the Senate order to produce Religious Freedom Review Expert Panel.
2. Cites the Senate’s Grounds for Public Interest Immunity Claims, where it states:
It is accepted that deliberations of the executive council and of the cabinet should be able to be conducted in secrecy so as to preserve the freedom of deliberation of those bodies. This ground, however, relates only to disclosure of deliberations. There has been a tendency for governments to claim that anything with a connection to cabinet is confidential.
3. Acknowledges the report does not relate to the deliberations of cabinet; and therefore
4. Insists the order for the production of documents be complied with by 3pm 20 September 2018.
And around and around the merry-go-round we go.
Updated
The strawberry laws are being introduced to the House.
After Scott Morrison implored people to make a pavlova and top it with strawberries, and Scott Buchholz took around strawberries and yoghurt (strangely, the Guardian office was missed in the delivery run). Labor started the morning with some strawberry-topped pancakes. Tanya Plibersek took charge of the pancake grill.
You can find more strawberry recipes here.
(I also missed out on the pancakes and strawberry feast. It’s an outrage)
Updated
Tom Connell is reporting on Sky that Ann Sudmalis is about to accept the United Nations UN trip – which sends MPs to New York for three months.
I understand Sudmalis may have attended the secondment when she was an advisor to Jo Gash, the former member for Gilmore*. So I guess she now gets to see it from the other side?
*I also understand the trip was privately funded, as staffers are not usually permitted on these secondments
Updated
The bells are ringing, so parliament is about to officially start.
The House will deal with the strawberry bills pretty quickly – just a reminder that while the maximum penalty for food tampering has been increased to 15 years, it is still up to a judge to decide, so I doubt we are going to see anyone put away for as long as a child pornographer.
The Senate also dealt with the governor general’s address-in-reply from two-and-a-bit years ago, last night, so that’s good to know.
Updated
But there is no indication that anyone from the Coalition will cross the floor against Peter Dutton for the motion, despite Tony Burke’s declaration that “they should. Effectively Peter Dutton is asking them to show more loyalty to him than he showed to them.”
Scott Morrison says it is just a distraction tactic. Here he is speaking to the Nine Network:
Labors and Greens passed a motion that they don’t like Peter Dutton any more. The Labor party and the Greens are just using their numbers to try and play politics. I won’t get distracted by it. It is politics in Canberra. People see through it.
Of course I do [have confidence in Dutton]. The Labor party is going on about stopping the au pairs. We are about stopping boats, bikies and criminal gangs. If the Labor party thinks that the worst thing that an au pair will come and read a bedtime story, that tells you what they think of national security.
Ministerial discretion has been part of the immigration system. I was an immigration minister. Those powers are important to give flexibility to deal with any number of difficult cases which the laws can’t cope with.
Updated
Anthony Albanese also had a few things to say about Peter Dutton this morning – and made sure to drop by doors so he could:
It’s very clear that Peter Dutton’s position as a minister in this ATM government – Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison – should be at an end and it should be at an end today. He should do the right thing and resign as a minister, as the provisions of Westminster mean that he must.
There is nothing more important than being honest as a minister before the parliament. That’s an essential component. It’s not optional.
And for people who describe themselves as conservatives, if Peter Dutton doesn’t resign himself, what he will be doing is trashing the institution of parliament, trashing the rules and conventions under the Westminster system.
These people aren’t really conservatives of course; they are just reactionaries. And Peter Dutton has quite clearly misled parliament, as the Senate committee has found.
Updated
Mike Bowers was at Royalla for the early-morning visit:
Updated
Scott Morrison made a drought announcement this morning.
He said trucks would now be able to carry longer and higher loads of hay and fodder on state- and national-controlled roads, to help the nation’s drought-stricken farmers.
He said heavy vehicles up to a maximum height of 4.6 metres and 2.83 metres wide will no longer require a permit to access the existing state-controlled road networks. Previously, access was limited for Class 3 vehicles up to 2.6 metres wide and 4.3 metres high.
The move will remove the need for up to 6,000 consents a year.
Morrison said it would help the large amount of fodder from Western Australia and Tasmania loaded and transported to drought-affected areas, particularly in NSW.
To make the announcement, Morrison visited the NSW community of Royalla, just south of Canberra.
He was with the deputy prime minister, Michael McCormack, the assistant minister for roads, Scott Buchholz, the Liberal senator Jim Molan, National Farmers’ Federation president, Fiona Simpson, the national drought coordinator, Major General Stephen Day, and Barnaby Joyce.
Joyce was there in his capacity as the “special envoy for drought assistance”, and was back in front of the camera sharing some Barnabyisms, so his political rehabilitation continues.
Updated
There has also been a lot of chatter about the “I stop these” boat sculpture in Scott Morrison’s office, first highlighted by the New York Times. I have never before heard anyone talk about that sculpture, which apparently was a gift from a constituent, which would suggest that it wasn’t in the most prominent spot in his old office. But I wouldn’t know – I’ve never been in there.
Most of our interviews, when they are done one-on-one, are done away from politician’s parliamentary office space, either in our own, their electorates or in the meeting rooms contained within their offices – they tend to be more of a suite of rooms, so more than one meeting can occur at one time.
But Tony Burke was asked about it at the end of his Sky interview:
You decide what the issues are after you have been in the portfolio and it’s not unusual to have something that reminds you of that time.
After I had finished as immigration minister I was sent a plaque with a whole lot of the names of unaccompanied children who I had got out of detention. I keep that in my office. It was a special thing to have.
I think the thing that is always forgotten is with people drowning at sea and the boats is that half of them drowned after the Malaysia option had been blocked and it was blocked when Scott Morrison held the portfolio.
It’s good that the boats had stopped now but that moment when half of those lives could have been saved I don’t think should ever be forgotten.
That interview was pre-recorded, and Zed Seselja, who was live in the studio and caught the end of the Burke pre-record being broadcast, seemed to say – at least to my ears – “that’s rubbish” or “absolute rubbish” in the moments before he was introduced.
Updated
Tony Burke appeared on Sky this morning to talk Peter Dutton and what the report found:
He was asked do you know them and was there any personal connection. And he said I don’t know them. He answered no and said I don’t know these people.
Now, when you look at that, that just wasn’t true. There are a whole lot of times where for different reasons; for incompetence, for appalling judgement we will argue that a minister shouldn’t hold the job.
Under our system of government there is one reason that is agreed that is the offence that no minister can cross. That is, you don’t mislead the parliament.
If it happens inadvertently, if your words come out wrong, you stand up at the first opportunity and you say, ‘I said I didn’t know people at all,’ and then you go through and explain the level of knowledge. But the statement that he did now know who these people were …
Reporter:
But it’s not like they are great mates, if you haven’t spoken to someone for 20 years. That’s his defence, I guess. He’s saying his defence would pass the pub test.
Burke:
You can argue whether or not it’s a defence in terms of the au pair decision. You can have that argument. I’ve got a different view but I accept that there’s an argument that he will raise on that.
There is no argument that says he told the truth to the parliament, none. And as a minister our whole system is based on the concept that our ministers will tell the truth.
Updated
Good morning
The Greens and Labor have picked right off where we left yesterday, talking about the no confidence motion Adam Bandt plans on moving against Peter Dutton, after a Senate committee found that he misled parliament.
The Coalition senators on that committee, Eric Abetz and Ian Macdonald, have agreed with Dutton that the inquiry, into whether he misused his powers to overturn a Australian Border Force decision to cancel the tourist visa for two au pairs the department believed had arrived with plans to work, was a “witch hunt”.
Dutton pre-empted the report’s conclusion yesterday by saying he believed it would find he was a “bad person” and that it was stacked against him, given that the committee was dominated by Labor and Green senators.
The committee, sans Macdonald and Abetz, found that he had misled parliament when he said he had no personal relationship with one of the host families involved in the au pair saga, and had gone above and beyond to use his powers, although it concluded he had still acted within them.
There is no word as yet on what Rebekha Sharkie and Cathy McGowan plan on doing when the vote comes to the House. They had both said they wanted to wait to see the report.
Meanwhile, Scott Morrison is keeping up the insane pace he has set himself to try to establish himself as a leader in people’s minds, starting the morning with Michael McCormack and Barnaby Joyce talking about the drought.
Joyce has well and truly decided his time in the cold is over and has picked up his envoy role with gusto.
Next month’s drought forum is what the government wants us to be talking about, but Labor and the Greens are working just as hard to make sure the conversation is centred around Dutton.
We’ll be tracking it all – Mike Bowers was out early this morning with Morrison and is back and prowling the hallways. I’ll bring you what he finds. And the Guardian brains trust are madly typing away and hitting the phones.
It’s the last sitting day of this session and things are getting antsy – I’m on coffee number three and ready to go, so let’s get into it!
Updated
