The wrap
What a day.
The Senate took the historic step of voting for marriage equality and managed to do it without taking on any of the amendments. Now for the House of Representatives. That won’t happen until at least 4 December.
A banking inquiry is inching closer – prepare for that battle.
And I doubt this is over for Sam Dastyari as yet. I would stay tuned on that one.
Mike Bowers is still wandering around, so if you want to see some of his shots from behind the scenes that I didn’t get to, check out his instagram and Twitter.
I am going to go unpack from Queensland and get ready for more Auspol fun tomorrow.
What will tomorrow bring? I don’t think any of us looked much further than the marriage bill. Having a look, it looks like there are some superannuation bills. There is also the possibility the banking inquiry could be voted on by the Senate.
On Friday, Michaelia Cash will be up again for another grilling, so there will be enough to sustain us through to the end of the week.
Thank you to everyone who played along today, and to the Guardian Australia brains trust for dragging my tired brain though this day. I’ll see you just after 8am tomorrow. Have a wonderful night.
Updated
Jordon Steele-John will deliver his maiden speech just after 5pm. We’ll bring you some more on that tomorrow.
Tony Abbott says he is disappointed the amendments didn’t get up with the marriage equality bill and he would like to see another attempt when it reaches the house of reps.
“It is disappointing that the government hasn’t done more that freedom of religion isn’t protected at the same time as marriage equality is passed,” he said.
Updated
Now the conversation moves to polls ... and the “warning signs” for Malcolm Turnbull, like the cabinet leaks, and backbenchers “giving you a free character assessment”.
Tony Abbott is asked his view on that:
It is not really my job to offer a running commentary ... If you get the policy right, the politics invariably follows, and the job of the prime minister and the government is to put in place policies which will take the pressure of power prices, off housing prices ... We do scale back immigration until infrastructure and housing catches up, because at the moment immigration is helping to drive up housing prices and I think immigration is keeping wages repressed ... There is plenty for the government to be getting on with.
Updated
Tony Abbott is on 2GB. He describes the Sam Dastyari story as “reckless political conduct” and Bill Shorten “has to sort it out quick smart”.
“He is a serial offender. He is utterly accident prone ... He is reckless and he has very, very poor judgment, and if you have consistent poor judgment ... it is time for you to reconsider whether you should still be there.”
Updated
I think there are a lot of people feeling like this now.
So I said to Penny I said, “It’s been a long day.” She said to me she said, “It’s been a long decade.” @SenatorWong One more house to go @AMEquality pic.twitter.com/mf6gd71bt6
— Magda Szubanski (@MagdaSzubanski) November 29, 2017
Updated
Nationals sen. Barry O'Sullivan as the debate on the bill to amend the marriage act wound up this afternoon& was passed without amendments (except for some minor technical changes) @AmyRemeikis @murpharoo @GuardianAus #politicslive https://t.co/9N8eQkcqIL pic.twitter.com/PHrkWQK5HU
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) November 29, 2017
Sky News is reporting a ReachTel poll showing on the two-party preferred measure Labor is leading 53 to 47 per cent
The number of respondents who support a banking royal commission? 69 per cent
Primary votes are pretty interesting:
Coalition - 33 per cent
Labor - 36 per cent
Greens - 10 per cent
One Nation – 9 per cent
Malcolm Turnbull still sits ahead of Bill Shorten as preferred PM, 52 to 48 per cent.
A bit of movement on section 44, and it is not just looking at citizenship.
This has just popped up from Malcolm Turnbull’s office:
Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters to examine operation of section 44
Today I have referred a number of matters relating to citizenship and the operation of section 44 of the constitution to the joint standing committee on electoral matters (JSCEM) and released the terms of reference.
Australia is the most successful multicultural society in the world and around a half of our citizens were either born overseas or have a parent born overseas. These Australians may be citizens of another country and, as we have seen with several members and senators, not be aware of it.
I have asked the JSCEM to examine how our electoral laws can be improved to minimise the risk of candidates being found to be ineligible in the future and what, if any, changes should be made to section 44(i) of the constitution.
JSCEM is also being asked to review the operation of section 44 of the constitution as a whole, as other provisions have raised questions regarding eligibility.
Australians expect us to resolve the citizenship issue once and for all. The government has already acted to resolve the citizenship issues affecting the current parliament. This inquiry will help us ensure similar issues do not affect future parliaments.
More information and the terms of reference can be found at: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Electoral_Matters/Inquiry_into_matters_relating_to_Section_44_of_the_Constitution
Updated
Queensland election update – still no result.
Updated
Yes and no.
#Yes (plus two abstainers up the back, Senators McGrath and McKenzie) @AmyRemeikis @GuardianAus @murpharoo @Paul_Karp #politicslive https://t.co/9N8eQkcqIL #auspol pic.twitter.com/MDLIYQDHS3
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) November 29, 2017
Updated
There have been a few questions as to where some of the Labor senators have been today.
Quite a few Labor identities have been at the funeral of former senator Steve Hutchins.
I am a YES voter and was there until we adjourned last night. Today I had to be at Westmead Children’s hospital with one of my children who is having major surgery.
— Katy Gallagher (@SenKatyG) November 29, 2017
In another tweet, Gallagher said she was “internally paired with a no voter so that vote would reflect our positions”.
Things have calmed down here for the moment, so turning to the House sitting next week.
Marriage equality will be the big issue, at least at first. Any guesses on how Tony Abbott will vote?
And of course, the dual citizenship issue won’t be going anywhere. So should be a fun-filled week.
(My threshold of fun is quite low, I know)
Updated
Senate question time ends.
Life moves on.
Matt Canavan says he does agree with George Christensen that the government “needs to do more”, particularly when it comes to the disconnect with regional voters.
Does Matt Canavan agree with George Brandis that “flirting with One Nation is poison”, Murray Watt asks?
Canavan says there was no deal at the Queensland election and if there was, it was “the worst deal in history”, he says, as One Nation preferences ended up helping to elect “something like 10 or 11 Labor MPs”.
Asked about Andrew Broad’s comments (those would be the failure of leadership ones) George Brandis says he is not in the habit of following Broad’s observations.
Someone fetch the aloe vera.
Brandis is asked about whether any steps are being taken to revisit the Coalition agreement between Barnaby Joyce and Malcolm Turnbull in 2016, and says “no steps are being taken”.
Updated
I never thought I would say this, but I miss the HoR question time.
Please remind me of this, this time next week when I am tearing my hair out.
Malcolm Turnbull, Julie Bishop and Marise Payne have issued a joint release on North Korea’s latest missile test:
Australia condemns North Korea’s latest intercontinental ballistic missile launch in the strongest possible terms.
This morning’s launch highlights the unacceptable threat North Korea poses to global peace and stability. Its actions are illegal and dangerous.
Australia is playing an active role in the international campaign to exert maximum economic and diplomatic pressure on North Korea.
As part of international efforts, the foreign minister has today announced that another 11 individuals and nine entities will be listed under Australia’s autonomous sanctions, for their association with North Korea’s illegal weapons programs or flouting of UN security council resolutions.
Australia’s autonomous sanctions complement the UN security council resolutions which impose comprehensive sanctions on the North Korean regime.
During the recent East Asia Summit, the region’s leaders were unanimous in urging North Korea to immediately comply with its obligations under all UN security council resolutions.
Today’s missile launch emphasises the urgency for all countries, especially the permanent five members of the security council, to fully implement UNSC sanctions as soon as possible in order to maximise pressure on Pyongyang and compel it to return to negotiations.
We will continue to work closely with the United States, the Republic of Korea, Japan, China and our partners to show this rogue regime that it is utterly isolated and its current path is unacceptable.
*end statement*
Updated
List of Senators who abstained or were not in the chamber #auspol #MarriageEquality pic.twitter.com/QOQgjS5uzk
— Political Alert (@political_alert) November 29, 2017
Tony Burke has released a statement questioning, again, why the House sitting was suspended this week:
As had been expected, the Senate has now passed a bill for marriage equality today. With the Senate passing the bill, the government’s reason for cancelling a whole week of sittings for the House of Representatives has been blown out of the water.
On the day the government announced it was cancelling a week of parliament, the leader of the house, Christopher Pyne, said:
“The Senate has set a timeline that means it is unlikely to finish debating the marriage equality bill until 30 November. On that basis, and as the house is not currently sitting, the prime minister and I have consulted the Speaker and asked that he set an alternative day for the next meeting of the house, in accordance with the standing orders.”
(PYNE – MEDIA RELEASE – 20 NOVEMBER 2017)
If the prime minister had not cancelled a week of parliament, the House of Representatives could be debating the bill for marriage equality today and into tomorrow. The Senate has done its job, if the prime minister had turned up for work the House of Representatives could be doing its job right now.
From the very beginning it was clear that the real reason the government had cancelled a week of parliament was because Mr Turnbull was afraid of what his backbench would do. But today, the excuses offered by the government have been exposed as a sham.
*end statement*
Updated
The push from within Coalition ranks to establish a banking inquiry over the head of the prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, looks set to succeed in the Senate.
After negotiations overnight, Liberal National senator Barry O’Sullivan has agreed to a series of amendments proposed by the Greens in return for their support.
With the Greens support, and Labor promising to back O’Sullivan’s private member’s bill, it looks set to pass the Senate before travelling to the House of Representatives where it has a serious chance of passing.
Dissident Coalition MP George Christensen, and fellow Queenslander Llew O’Brien, have said they intend to cross the floor of the House to vote for it.
“We will now have a fair dinkum inquiry, if this passes the House, into the financial and banking sector,” the Greens leader, Richard Di Natale, said on Wednesday.
“My message to every bank chief executive across the country is get ready for an inquiry, it’s coming, and you’re going to have to answer to those victims that you’ve preyed on for so long.”
Updated
Simon Birmingham takes a dixer from Linda Reynolds on childcare.
I detest Senate dixers as much as I detest the House dixers. Maybe more so. Asking a supplementary question to a dixer is one of the most ridiculous conventions in our parliament.
Updated
Sarah Hanson-Young has asked about what communications minister, Mitch Fifield, is doing about the sexual harassment allegations within the Australian media industry. He says
In an interview yesterday on ABC Radio National with Fran Kelly, she raised the recent coverage that there has been in relation to harassment in the media industry, and I said to Ms Kelly that there was never an excuse for harassment, there was never a justification for harassment, and that anyone who was in that situation should bring that forward to the relevant management of the organisation and, where appropriate, bring it forward to relevant law enforcement agencies. In the conversation with Ms Kelly, she asked if this was something that was taken seriously, and I said that absolutely it was, and that in the meetings that I have frequently with media executives, I would be emphasising that this is a serious and important matter. I should note that a number of media organisations have, over recent days, indicated that they have appropriate workplace policies in these areas, and that they take these matters extremely seriously.
Updated
Updated
Well, that didn’t take long. David Bushby asks about Sam Dastyari.
George Brandis is more than happy to answer.
“As I stated this morning,this is a serious test for Mr Shorten, who last year dealt with Senator Dastyari with a slap on the wrist, benching him for less than five months, only then to reward him with a senior parliamentary position in this chamber. This morning, rather than calling for Senator Dastyari to provide a full account to the public and the parliament, Mr Shorten has issued a statement that appears to excuse Senator Dastyari’s deliberate concealment of his conversations with Mr Huang because he did not pass on any classified information.
“The opposition leader has so spectacularly failed to grasp the importance of the situation that he appears to consider it acceptable for one of his senior colleagues to advise foreign nationals on how to conceal their conversations from Australian security agencies.”
Labor’s Doug Cameron is up next and he asks about the prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, dining with a Chinese donor after he gave $40,000 to the Queensland LNP.
Brandis says he is not familiar with those reports.
Updated
But it straight back to business and Senate QT.
Penny Wong’s first questions to George Brandis are about North Korea.
It’s a pretty emotional day here
Alex Greenwich tears up as he thanks Dean Smith for his advocacy. "From one gay man to another..." pic.twitter.com/ydOQaSM0Mq
— Lane Sainty (@lanesainty) November 29, 2017
Ian Macdonald voted yes, for those asking.
We are working on a list of who abstained, but Bridget McKenzie and James McGrath sat to the side of the chamber as the vote occurred.
Pauline Hanson abstained. Michaelia Cash wasn’t in the chamber
Have just had it confirmed from her office: cabinet minister Michaelia Cash abstained from voting #auspol #marriageequality
— Bevan Shields (@BevanShields) November 29, 2017
Updated
Richard Di Natale:
There aren’t many days in this job that fill you with sheer unadulterated joy – sheer. But this is one of them. We’ve given a nation so much grief and despair over recent months, but today we have filled Australia with love. Love has made its way through the Senate. It is unstoppable now through the House. This is such a great occasion. It is a great moment. What we’ve seen today is the parliament at its finest, working together, working together with a common cause and that common cause was equality and love.
I won’t say much more. There are number of –number of moments I will remember through this campaign. One recently was walking into Senator Smith’s office, signing my name onto this legislation underneath the portrait of the Queen. And ... I want to thank Dean, Penny, Janet, all the co-sponsors of this legislation. Sarah who has worked so hard on this, my parliamentary colleagues when I was in the chamber. I’m so proud of my team and of the parliament and I am so proud of Australia today. Thank you.
Updated
Penny Wong:
I’m a bit lost for words. That doesn’t happen very often. I said in the chamber today that it is always a privilege to stand in the chamber but there are days when you feel like you are part of changing the nation, sometimes for the better and sometimes not so. I was there when WorkChoices went through. He wasn’t! Which obviously saw the demise of the Howard government. I’ve been there on other big votes but this is an important day, a day of great celebration for so many people across this country.
The only thing I want to do is to thank people. I want to thank Smith ... Smith? Senator Smith! For his courage and integrity and for being willing to do what he has done with us. I want to thank all of the co-sponsors of this legislation, I want to thank the yes campaign, all of the Australian people who supported us and I want to thank all of those who came before. And I want to thank the Australian Labor party, who has been on a journey and you saw where that journey has led us to in the voting on this bill throughout this week. So thank you all.
Updated
Dean Smith begins the press conference by reminding people, again, that there were those who fought for this before him:
By any measure, today is a remarkable day. But my first comments are for those many people who have been fighting for this well before Dean Smith thought he should get involved. Well before. Let’s be clear. The courage that was required to stop this fight, stop this argument, to claw for equality before the law, was much harder to do in the past than it has been to do in the present. So my first thoughts are absolutely with all of those who have gone before us. As I mentioned in my contribution in the Senate a few moments ago, this is the Senate’s day.
Penny Wong and Dean Smith headed to the press conference celebrating the Senate win together.
There are cheers and thumbs up and a lot of rainbows and smiles.
This place doesn’t always get it right. But when it does – well, my heart is pretty full right now.
Big advocates press conference happening outside now pic.twitter.com/g9bzTJfyGU
— Lane Sainty (@lanesainty) November 29, 2017
Updated
The moment the bill was passed (in the Senate).
Labor leader Penny Wong celebrates the passing of the bill to amend the marriage act @murpharoo @AmyRemeikis @GuardianAus #politicslive https://t.co/9N8eQku1Aj pic.twitter.com/K8nV7katmt
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) November 29, 2017
Updated
For those wondering who voted no:
Concetta Fierravanti-Wells
Eric Abetz
Chris Ketter
Fraser Anning
Cory Bernardi
John Williams
Helen Polley
Lucy Gichuhu
Brian Burston
Matt Canavan
Slade Brockman
Barry O’Sullivan
Applause breaks out and the chamber comes together to congratulate Dean Smith and hug. Penny Wong is one of the first to give Smith a hug.
The Senate is cheering. Simon Birmingham can be seen taking a special moment to say thank you to George Brandis. Brandis nods and Birmingham says it again.
There are still tears, hugs and laughter (including some from this correspondent) but Scott Ryan calls for business to continue as usual – the Senate moves on to statements.
*Apologies for the Stephen Parry reference. My brain is still a bit frazzled.
Updated
Marriage equality passes the Senate
The final vote has been counted and it passes 43-12
Dean Smith counted the ayes. He smiled as he gives the results
The House of Representatives will go through this same process next week.
Final speech before historic vote
Dean Smith delivered his speech, the final before the vote:
Just under three years ago, I moved from ‘no’ to ‘yes’. At 30,000ft on a flight from Perth to Albany, I reflected on the life of Tori Johnson. Tori lost his life in the Lindt terrorist siege. He was brave, he was courageous and he had a partner named Thomas. On that flight I thought of their love, I thought of their loss and it changed me. I realised that people with real lives deserve their love to be blessed and affirmed by the institution of marriage if they so choose. Mr President, I am, as many of you know, a man who draws strength from institutions. They are the structures that bind us as communities and as a nation, so I begin by acknowledging my pride in this institution, the Australian Senate.
Every senator has brought honour to their state and to the pillar of democracy to which we all belong. This has been a respectful debate. But, I should add, not an insipid one. It has drawn out intellect, wisdom, judgment and compassion. In this debate, we saw the soul of the attorney, the lived experience of Senator Wong, Senator Rice and Senator Pratt. The conscience of those who oppose this bill and the conviction of those who supported it. In a time when institutions are questioned, we have seen in this debate how our parliament was meant to work, where life experience informed decisions, where amendments awaited and assessed against good argument, and where we debate according to an argument’s merits, rather than taking the political shortcut of questioning each other’s motives or integrity.
The real question out of this debate is why isn’t our parliament like this more often? Mr President, over the past few years there have been times when it has been tough not to not be part of the majority of my party on this issue. I had to find my place where my conscience and my duty could be reconciled. So, I say to all in this chamber, be kind to those who, in following their conscience, choose a different path. They have my respect and I ask you to give them yours. There is a cost that accompanies the privilege of service but that cost should never include giving up one’s conscience. It is for that reason the bill includes protections for religious liberty.
Mr President, I am a conservative. A true conservative does not believe they are the embodiment of all wisdom ... They are simply supposed to weigh change. We weigh change by considering the past as well as listening to our contemporaries. I acknowledge all in this debate. Mr President, the debate confirmed the evolutionary nature of this bill. The lack of substantive amendments indicates we got the balance correct. The bill expresses a faith in the current architecture of Australia’s religious protections. The architecture is precise. It has allowed a multitude of faiths to thrive and that will not change. The bill is the fulfilment of the people’s will to extend equality to all citizens and it takes away no religious or civil right from anyone.
To those who have opposed this bill, I say there is enormous goodwill to ensure this is not triumph of one group over another. But the advancement of the sum of freedoms for all of us.
Unlike so much of what characterises modern politics, this is not triumph of one politician over another or even one party over another. Instead, it has restored faith in our parliament and in this Senate. Maybe again there is a broader lesson to be learned. So, like much of what we do here, most of the real winners we will never meet. We will never truly know what it means for the young Australian boy or girl who is working out that they are gay or lesbian or intersex or transgender. They will quickly realise they have nothing to fear. We will never meet the thousands of families that will bless their children at marriage ceremonies that will occur because of this bill. Those parents do not think of their children as LGBTI. They think of them by their name. To their parents, they have no rainbow initial because they only see them as flesh and blood.
They are kin and that is what matters most. This house, the embodiment of the states and the other place, the embodiment of our citizens, want the very same thing. We want the very best for our citizens, that they are loved and be loved. We want them to experience joy and hope and to experience exhilaration and its companion, heartache, because that is what it means to be human. In a world where there are more tensions between people, our country has offered a loving embrace to its own.
As the attorney general said, in the course of a generation we have seen the LGBTI community move from rejection to tolerance, tolerance to acceptance and now acceptance to embrace. We should be proud of that. I certainly am. This debate has demonstrated that the bill proposed is evolutionary in nature. There are no substantive changes. Is it perfect? No. As senators Di Natale and McKim admitted in their second reading speeches, it is a compromise. As Senator Kitching reminded us, it even brings together senators Rhiannon and Leyonhjelm, at least for a few brief moments.
But a few brief moments of joy is what our country has ached for because we know it will result in a lifetime of joy for so many others. As we prepare to vote, we should recall this has been a very long path. Some have put this case for a decade-and-a-half; others, like myself, are latecomers. For all, it has been an accepting and welcoming cause. The good book says that hope deferred makes the heart sick but a longing fulfilled is a tree of life.
We can say today, after so long, that our hopes are no longer deferred. Most in this chamber came from a party; our parties are in so many ways the modern tribes of our nation. Let me for a brief moment express my pride in my party. Liberal and National voters voted ‘yes’. Seventy-one out of 70 Coalition seats voted ‘yes’ because Coalition voters understand that this reflects the best of our Liberal and conservative traditions. It is correct to say that many people across this chamber can take pride in their role in bringing this to a successful conclusion.
A conclusion to this historic juncture. I especially want to thank ... my Coalition Senate colleagues Senator Birmingham, Senator Paine, Senator Reynolds and Senator Hume.
If there is a lesson from this debate for my party it is that we should not fear free debates. We should not fear conscience. The more the debate was resisted, the more the strength was found to fight for it. At some later point, we should reflect on how we can avoid that tortured process from ever having to happen again.
This debate has been good for the soul of the country. It has been good for the soul of this chamber and it will be good for the souls of LGBTI children throughout our great country. It has been good for us all. No matter if you were a ‘yes’ senator or a ‘no’ senator because we lived out the call of the saint.
In essential things, unity. In important things, diversity. In all things, generosity. Unity, diversity, generosity. They are the hallmark of this bill. They are the hallmark of this chamber and they are the hallmark of our shared great country, Australia. I commend the bill and move that it be read a third time.
The doors are locked and the vote is occurring.
Updated
Dean Smith has just taken the floor. His is the last speech before the vote.
Just before him, his colleague Linda Reynolds paid tribute to the work he had done to bring this back on the agenda:
It would be remiss of me not to say two things: one is this is absolutely the proudest day I have had in this chamber since I have been in this place and it not only reaffirms my faith in democracy and in the ability of the Australian people to have their say and conduct robust, but respectful debates, but it also demonstrates that we can do it in this chamber as well and I am so glad that the rest of the country today will see that we can come together.
But the second thing, and somebody who has not yet been acknowledged, is my good friend Dean Smith, Senator Smith. I have never been prouder to stand up in this place than I have been to stand with you, Dean, and it has not been easy on you, but you are a great Christian. You are a great Liberal. You have stood up for everything that you believe in and I could not have been prouder to stand up in something that we both believe in as Liberals together. Together as coalition MPs we have dealt with this issue with good grace and I think with great honour. For all in this chamber. Dean, I think, certainly on my behalf and I know many others, thank you for your courage, your perseverance and getting us to this vote.
Updated
Here is Penny Wong’s speech in full:
This day has been a long time coming, a day for which many of us have worked in our parties, a day for which many in the Australian community have worked, a day many of us have hoped for. It was not long ago in this country that gay and lesbian Australians were targeted by the criminal law for who they were.
It wasn’t that long ago. It was legal to discriminate us simply for who we are. But equality is a remarkably persistent principle. It is a defining principle. A principle that springs from the simple and powerful precept of the inherent dignity of every individual. Of every human being. And so it has been through human history. The aspiration for equality is the hallmark of our progress. So, today, we stand on the cusp of a remarkable achievement and an historic event, and we pause briefly to reflect just for a moment of what we are a part. We are a part of an act of acceptance, an act of inclusion, an act of respect, an act of celebration, a day when this Senate declares our acceptance of our LGBTIQ brothers and our sisters.
The bill that passed in this chamber was negotiated across party lines. It reflects an appropriate balance between delivering marriage equality and the protection of religious freedom. Mr President, as the Australian people voted to lessen discrimination, not to extend it, and we, the Senate, have respected that vote by rejecting amendments which sought to extend discrimination, or derail marriage equality, through debates which are better had elsewhere. I acknowledge the senators who have participated in this debate, which for most part has been respectful.
It is disappointing the House won’t be able to progress this until next week, but I do hope when it does so, it follows the example set by this chamber and ensures this parliament delivers on the promise to the Australian people and legislates for marriage equality.
Mr President, laws matter. They endow rights. But they do more than this. They express our values, who we are and what we believe as a nation. I am often asked what this law means for me and my family. This law matters to loving couples across the country, but what is more important is what it means for all of us. What it says to young LGBTIQ Australians, what it says to the young man struggling with who he is, or the young woman who feels alone and ashamed, what it says to the children of same-sex couples who feel ostracised. It says to so many Australians, this parliament, this country, accept you for who you are. Your love is not lesser, and nor are you. It says you’re one of us.
This day would not have come without the courage and dedication of all who have campaigned, and it would not have come without the decision of the Australian people to vote yes. And in that vote, the grace and decency of our countrymen and women shone through. And in voting yes they pushed our parliament to do what should be done. We may be their representatives, but in this, they have been our leaders. Every day, it is a great privilege to stand in this place, but there are some days which a change our country for the better. This is such a day.”
Updated
Concetta Fierravanti-Wells says she cannot support the bill, citing the failure of any amendments to be agreed to and says it is a difficult day for many older Australians, and their views should be remembered.
Updated
Greens senator Janet Rice, who has a rainbow flag draped around her neck, gives a special mention to former leader Bob Brown for the work he has done on this issue. She also mentions the discrimination transpeople and intersex people have suffered in particular, and what they have gone through.
I have been proud to stand up in this chamber for the whole rainbow spectrum, for lesbian and gay people, intersexual people, but in particular for transgender people as well. They have suffered incredible vilification and hatred being directed towards them, particularly over the last two months, and in fact the attacks on them have continued in this chamber right up until this morning. So, yes, transpeople deserve to be loved as well. Transpeople are normal. Transpeople are equal. They are part of our wonderful family. I am very privileged to be here representing transpeople in particular.
Updated
Barry O’Sullivan pays his respects to those who had the “courage of their conviction” to say no and says he will also be voting no.
Pauline Hanson tells the chamber she has gay friends. But she will be abstaining, because she does not believe there are enough protections for those who don’t agree.
James Paterson will be voting yes, although warns that the chamber will most likely be back dealing with “freedom of liberty and freedom of choice”.
Eric Abetz announces he will be voting no, in “solidarity with those over 100,000 Tasmanians who voted no”.
He had previously said he would vote with his state’s wishes. Tasmania voted for marriage equality, but Abetz says he feels the need to vote in support of those who disagreed, because: democracy.
Updated
There are a whole lot of senators wanting to speak on this, so George Brandis has moved a motion to keep debating past 12.45.
“So today in this Senate and next week in the House of Representatives we will see this historic change,” George Brandis says.
He says he was not a supporter of the plebiscite, but is now “so glad” that “we involved every man and woman” in making the decision, is “so delighted” in the decision, is “so grateful” for the grace and dignity of those who voted no, but have accepted the decision, and is “so proud of Australian democracy, more proud than I have ever been”.
Richard Di Natale says it is a day when Australia sends discriminatory laws to the dustbin of political history.
“I am so proud of my team, I am so proud of this parliament and today I am so proud of my country.”
*Scott Ryan reminds the Senate it is moving to other business at 12.45.
Derryn Hinch is giving his views “I think this country now is wonderful” and now Matt Canavan is putting on the record “my congratulations” to those who won marriage equality, but he can’t support the unamended bill.
Four minutes until the Senate moves to something else, which would put the vote off until 4pm.
Updated
But wait, the bill has just passed the committee stage. Penny Wong is now moving it for a third time. She is racing through her speech.
“Laws matter. They endow rights. But they do more than this. They express our values – who we are and what we believe as a nation,” she says, with a crack in the composure.
I will bring you more of this speech in just a moment. She finishes to applause (“There are some days that change our country for the better. This is such a day”) and George Brandis is now giving his speech.
Updated
Small hiccup on the timing of the Senate vote on marriage equality: senators’ statements start at 12.45pm and the Senate hasn’t managed to shift the timing of those. Which means unless all this finishes up in the next 15 minutes, the vote won’t occur until after Senate question time.
That would be sometime after 4pm.
Updated
As those final amendments are voted on, we’ll quickly duck to Victoria, where voluntary assisted dying will be legal from 2019, after its legislation passed the parliament.
Premier Daniel Andrews had this to say:
This is a day that I am very proud to have made this reform and to have led a team that has delivered the sort of leadership that all Victorians can be proud of. For too long, we have denied, to too many, the compassion, the control, the power that should be theirs, should be theirs in those final moments of their life. Any reading of those terribly violent, tragic coronial inquests brings you to the conclusion that we can do more and better, and that we must, and that’s exactly what the Parliament has done with the historic vote to make legal voluntary assisted dying, Australia being the first state to do so in our nation.
The Greens have put all their amendments together, with Janet Rice saying she hopes to move through them quickly.
We are almost there, folks. From there, it goes to the House of Representatives ... next week. When the house is actually sitting. Because, you know, it was suspended this week.
Updated
David Leyonhjelm’s amendments didn’t get a whole lot of support - his last attempt was voted down 37 to 5
Senators Cory Bernardi and Fraser Anning vote for Sen. David Leyonhjelm's amendments as debate continues in the senate on the bill to amend the marriage act @AmyRemeikis @murpharoo @GuardianAus #politicslive https://t.co/9N8eQku1Aj #auspol pic.twitter.com/qRbwaStAzr
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) November 29, 2017
Homophobic bakers, florists and candlestick makers (and any other vendor) will not be allowed to discriminate against potential clients for being gay. Another amendment down. We move on to the Greens, who want to amend the legislation so civil celebrants would not be able to discriminate, which is also expected to fail.
Inching closer to this being passed.
Malcolm Turnbull ends his press conference and someone nearby breaks into enthusiastic, but lone applause.
The amendments to the marriage equality bill keep being knocked over, which means the legislation is almost through the Senate, largely unamended.
Updated
Turnbull to Dastyari: Whose side are you on?
On Sam Dastyari, Malcolm Turnbull continues the “whose side is he on” line:
This is a very, very serious issue of national security. Sam Dastyari has a lot of questions to answer and Bill Shorten has even more. What did Bill Shorten tell Sam Dastyari indirectly or directly about possible interest from security services interested in Huang Xiangmo?What did he tell him and how can he allow him to remain on the front bench? Whose side is Senator Dastyari on? Not Australia’s it seems. Sam Dastyari should not be on the frontbench ... and he should really be considering his current position in the Senate.
We’ve had so many issues of citizenship lately, there is the question for Sam Dastyari ... ‘Whose side are you on, and why are you giving advice to a foreign national, closely linked to a foreign government from China, Mr Huang Xiangmo?’
Updated
Malcolm Turnbull has popped up in Gosford, where he is speaking ‘jobs, jobs, jobs’ and it looks like he is continuing with the habit of interviewing the people who he has come to visit.
It is never not awkward. Mostly because he not only asks the question, he then gives his interpretation of their answer. Hopefully this will stop soon.
Pauline Hanson, who has lost two senators to section 44, is now explaining the constitution to the chamber.
Given the mention of the bunyip, also known as the yowie, a former senator claims to have seen one during a school camp in the Gold Coast hinterland, south of Brisbane, in 1977.
Updated
It has been a long week.
George Brandis is speaking about why he won’t be supporting the latest amendments put forward on allowing all those bakers, florists and other wedding vendors who just cannot bring themselves to serve a gay couple, and he brings out this line:
Like the search for the bunyip, the search for the homophobic florist goes relentlessly and unavailingly on.”
Updated
Ian Macdonald should be happy – Barry O’Sullivan is now sitting in the President’s chair.
Those two have quite the double-act when it comes to committees. While the amendments continue, here are some background shots.
Updated
Everything is fine
I concur with my Nationals colleague Andrew Broad. A true leader would have sought to capture the will of the people and protect freedoms, not this hands-off approach. https://t.co/lQhVPwwSFB
— George Christensen (@GChristensenMP) November 28, 2017
Leyonhjelm’s amendments are about to fail. Then the Greens will be up, and they are expected to fail as well.
In other news, Magda Szubanski is speaking at the National Press Club. So it looks like she’ll be getting the news the bill has passed the Senate just before she takes the stage.
Thanks! Looking forward to talking to you all!! @PressClubAust Televised LIVE!! on @ABCTV at 12.30 pm EDST Feeling 😊 but also 😱 @AMEquality https://t.co/wk2KEKx0bR
— Magda Szubanski (@MagdaSzubanski) November 28, 2017
Updated
Shorten responds to Dastyari story
Bill Shorten has released a statement on the Sam Dastyari story, where he makes it clear that the NSW senator is on his last chance:
I’ve made it clear publicly and privately that Labor will not accept donations from Mr Huang. Mr Turnbull has refused to do the same for the Liberal party.
I receive regular confidential briefings from our security agencies.
I don’t discuss the detail of those briefings with anyone, including Senator Dastyari, however I do not believe the senator is the subject of any national security investigation.
I have also spoken to Senator Dastyari, who has never made a secret of the fact that this meeting took place. He has again confirmed that he did not pass on any classified information, because he didn’t have any.
I wrote to Mr Turnbull months ago asking for the government to consider a foreign agents register and banning foreign donations. Turnbull’s monumental failure of leadership and his decision to cancel parliament this week means that these matters cannot be considered.
I have made it clear to Senator Dastyari that this is not the first time his judgment has been called into question, but I certainly expect it to be the last.
*end statement*
Updated
The great scarf debate has ended.
David Leyonhjelm’s amendments are now being debated
Senator Eric Abetz talks to greens senator Janet Rice as the debate on the bill to amend the marriage act stretches into a third day @AmyRemeikis @murpharoo @GuardianAus #politicslive https://t.co/9N8eQku1Aj pic.twitter.com/C6ubBNL11g
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) November 28, 2017
Penny Wong has had enough. She just gave a sigh which could have been felt in Cairns.
She asks Ian Macdonald for a little courtesy. Macdonald is still yelling.
Once again, this is over a scarf.
“There is a senator in this chamber, to anyone’s view, is not complying with those rules,” he said.
Peter Whish-Wilson points out that Sarah Hanson-Young is wearing a rainbow dress, and would have to take it off if Hinch is made to remove the scarf.
He’s told to sit down. Macdonald says he will give Hanson-Young his handkerchief, “not to cover the dress, but for the flood of tears which will no doubt come”.
Ladies and gentlemen, your 45th parliament.
Updated
Updated
Amendments fail
Pauline Hanson’s amendments were voted down 36 to 17.
Ian Macdonald is still complaining about Derryn Hinch’s scarf.
Updated
The division is ongoing and I can hear Ian Macdonald still yelling in the chamber.
Ian MacDonald is trying to raise standing orders by claiming Hinch shouldn't be wearing a rainbow scarf in #MarriageEquality debate #auspol
— Paul Karp (@Paul_Karp) November 28, 2017
Updated
While we wait on the vote on the One Nation amendments (which will not get up) let’s take a look at the interview Simon Birmingham gave to AM this morning.
He was asked about the banking royal commission and had this to say:
Well look, we have, in the Liberal and National party long accorded our members and senators the right to cross the floor. Members crossed the floor in the Howard government, in the Fraser government, in the Menzies government. It’s not unusual, it will happen again in the future – whether it’s on banking issues or others. I am absolutely confident that as the right of Liberals and Nationals, they will exercise it from time to time.
As for and Andrew Broad’s comments in regards to Malcolm Turnbull’s “failure of leadership”.
Mr Broad is somebody who threatened to leave the Coalition if there wasn’t a public vote in relation to marriage equality; Malcolm Turnbull, despite fierce opposition from the parliament, showed strong leadership and found a way to deliver a public vote. It was an overwhelming success with 80% of Australians participating, 62% of people voting yes for marriage equality – including a majority of the people in Andrew Broad’s own electorate. Now I appreciate that Mr Broad’s personal convictions are against same-sex marriage – have been for a long time, no doubt still are – but that is not a case to stand in the way of change.
The bill that is before the parliament firstly provides very strong religious protections. People, when this is passed, will still be able to turn up to their place of worship according to their belief, their doctrines, their faith. Their church, their synagogue, their mosque will still be able to turn away same-sex couples and say: ‘We want nothing to do with your marriage.’ Their ministers of religion will be able to turn away same-sex couples and say: ‘We want nothing to do with your marriage.’ Those religious protections in relation to same-sex marriage are clear and strong in the Smith bill as it stands.
Now, of course, other matters that are raised go much, much broader in terms of debates around religious protections generally, and that’s what Philip Ruddock and Fr Frank Brennan are now going to have a look at and report back early next year.
Updated
Having just come from Queensland, I spoke to quite a lot of people in the Liberal National party. Keep an eye on the next Senate ticket at the next election and the names that likely won’t be there. From the chats I had, that shake-up is still very much on the cards.
Updated
Ian Macdonald has “many gay friends” but still can’t understand why they need the word “marriage”, but he also says he has been part of a government which has “removed all discriminations” against gay people.
If you can make sense of that, you are doing better than me this morning.
We have now had a mention of “it’s a free country”.
He challenges anyone to say that he is not allowed to tell the chamber that he is a Christian, if “not a very good one”, and a member of the Anglican church. No one is challenging him. No one is attempting to stop him from saying that. But it seems very important to Senator Macdonald.
Just as important, in this “intolerant age we are living in”, is that Peter Whish-Wilson wore an “insignia” while he was sitting in the president’s chair. Whish-Wilson took off his marriage equality badge on Tuesday, after complaints from senators, most particularly Macdonald. But it is still bothering him.
He tells the chamber he went to a conference, where “an Italian lady” delegate criticised the Russians for putting LGBTI people into detention camps, and how the Russian delegate responded by saying some countries put gay people to death.
The Greens, Macdonald says, never talk about those countries where people are put to death for being gay, and says again that Australia has removed all discriminations against the LGBTI community. And that he has been part of removing those discriminations.
He winds up with his “distress” that Christians could be becoming “second-rate citizens”.
And he finally sits down. The point of all of that, apparently, is that he supports One Nation’s amendments, even if he doesn’t think they are as good as some of the other amendments which have already been voted down.
Updated
Ian Macdonald now has the floor. He says he is exercising his conscience in this debate, and no one speaks for him.
He, like Abetz, supports Hanson’s amendment. He doesn’t think it is good as some of the others, but believes it offers some protections, which he thinks are common sense.
Now he turns his attention to Labor for voting as a political party on the amendments and also makes a mention of the “fact” that “many in the Labor party are not Christians and do not say the Lord’s prayer”.
Louise Pratt rises with a point of order, that once again someone is commenting on the religious practices of senators.
The ruling comes again that the reflections on senators’ religion stop. Macdonald wants the page of the ruling. Then he begins arguing that he never reflected on a senator’s religion.
“This chamber should be the bastion of free speech. We used to have free speech in Australia,” he says.
He argues that Derryn Hinch told the chamber he was an atheist, and he wasn’t stopped under the standing orders.
“This is the most ridiculous ruling I have ever heard. Most of the Labor party will tell you they are not against Christians and do not support Christianity. I am merely repeating that,” he yells across the chamber.
“Respect is a very two-way seat,” he says, after he is asked to respect the ruling.
Updated
Eric Abetz says “the will of the Australian people was regrettably to change the marriage act”, in response to Hanson’s questioning of the survey as a “true and clear reflection” of what the people wanted.
Abetz wants to be able to say “this was a regrettable change” and for that to be tolerated and OK.
He says it is amazing that those who “preach tolerance are often the most intolerant of those who disagree with them”.
This debate is going places.
Updated
It’s at this point I will remind you that Pauline Hanson, who said she speaks for the people and whose chief adviser said would win at least 10 seats in the Queensland election, is still waiting to hear if she has won one.
Updated
Pauline Hanson is now complaining that there are those on the Labor side of the chamber who do not say “the Lord’s prayer”.
She is told to stop reflecting on the religious practices of others in the chamber.
Eventually, we move on.
I see there is a lot of intolerance that is happening in this chamber, the whole fact is, it is not taking into consideration those people who are marriage celebrants, who for whatever reason, whether it be religious or non-religious reasons, because they don’t wish to marry a couple, are going to be left themselves wide open, because you may be sued or for litigation.
“We are allowing political correctness and minorities” to take over what views we can have in this country,” Hanson says. It is “thought police” she says.
Pauline Hanson is on her feet and is questioning whether the vote was done “lawfully” and whether it is a “true and a clear reflection of what Australians wanted”. She says she has “heard” some people didn’t get the vote at all.
I am too tired for this.
“It is actually of great concern to me, that this is being pushed through the chamber,” Hanson says.
Updated
For those playing along at home, here is the schedule.
But the Senate should move through the remaining amendments to the marriage equality bill fairly quickly. There is the Greens amendment to stop civil celebrants from being able to reject ceremonies based on their religious beliefs.
On the flip side of that are amendments from One Nation and David Leyonhjelm who want them to be able to reject ceremonies.
All are expected to fail.
Updated
The bells are ringing for the opening of the Senate session.
Updated
Let’s take a look at some of Mike Bowers’ work from overnight.
Updated
The government of course, is thrilled to have the Sam Dastyari story, as a distraction. And I think we can expect a reaction pretty close to New Zealand day, as they pick this up and run with it. We did just hear the attorney general stop just short of calling Dastyari a spy, unless you have a different interpretation of this line:
Why would anyone acting in good faith warn a benefactor to have a conversation in circumstances that are only consistent with engaging in counter-surveillance activity.
But the government then also has to deal with why it has yet to ban foreign donations. Brandis says they are working on it, but it does dull the attack somewhat.
Meanwhile, over at Labor HQ, they’ve spent some time going through the pic archives:
Mr Huang with PM🎩 #auspol pic.twitter.com/xL8PYSAX5v
— Shorten_Suite 🌈 (@Shorten_Suite) November 28, 2017
Mr Huang and @JulieBishopMP #auspol pic.twitter.com/d7tuvTMan8
— Shorten_Suite 🌈 (@Shorten_Suite) November 28, 2017
Updated
George Brandis has had a bit to say on the Sam Dastyari story:
One has to ask the question, why would anyone acting in good faith warn a benefactor to have a conversation in circumstances that are only consistent with engaging in counter-surveillance activity. Why would an innocent person do that? What was he trying to hide? What was he worried that those whom he suspected were carrying out surveillance might learn about what he was telling the Chinese benefactor?
Senator Dastyari, of course, has very serious questions to answer that we will be raising, I will be raising in the Senate during the course of the day. But more importantly, Mr Shorten has questions to answer. He benched Senator Dastyari very briefly last year. Senator Dastyari was swiftly reincluded in the Senate leadership team of the Labor party. We know he remains one of Bill Shorten’s praetorian guard. As the foreign minister has said, the position is untenable. It is not just a test for Senator Dastyari, it is a test for Mr Shorten too.”
Updated
Julie Bishop and George Brandis are now speaking to the media.
Bishop:
The attorney general and I can announce today a major step forward in the fight against Isis. We have confirmation that the city of al-Raqqa in al-Raqqa province in Syria is no longer under the control of the terrorist organisation Isis as a result of military action taken by the anti-Isis forces, backed up by the coalition forces, including Australia.
This means that Australian citizens who travel to al-Raqqa will no longer be subject to the criminal code defences that made it an offence to travel to al-Raqqa without legitimate purpose. This is an important milestone in the fight against Isis, because the retaking of al-Raqqa deprives this terrorist organisation of an operating base in Syria.
It takes away revenue that it has been receiving to fund attacks elsewhere. And it destroys the propaganda that Isis is invincible. Isis remains a dangerous threat. It is likely to emerge elsewhere, with its violent, insurgency activities and we will continue to be committed to the fight against Isis. In terms of travel to Syria and Iraq more generally, the Australian government’s advice is that Australians should not travel to Syria, Iraq, and it remains so designated on the Smart Traveller website.
Just before I hand over to the attorney general on this matter, I also state in relation to North Korea’s missile test today that the Australian government condemns in the strongest possible terms North Korea’s continued violation ofUnited Nations security council resolutions. We call on the North Korean regime to abandon its illegal programs and focus on the plight of the long-suffering North Korean people.
This week, I have designated a further nine individuals and 11 entities who have been associated with the illegal weapons programs in North Korea in support of the collective international effort to impose sanctions on North Korea to bring it back to the negotiating table. So we seek to compel North Korea back to the negotiating table and to deter it from further illegal actions.
Updated
Speaking to Sky News, Richard Marles said he questioned where the source of the Sam Dastyari story came from. But he says the actual issue is something else entirely.
“What matters here is we need to be banning foreign donations,” he said.
The assistant immigration minister, Alex Hawke, has picked up from George Brandis’s line, wanting to know where Dastyari’s allegiances lie. He calls him “Iranian-born” while making the point that “Labor has been ridiculing” the government over the dual citizenship issue.
Brandis and the foreign minister, Julie Bishop, will be holding a press conference on the issue in the next few minutes.
Updated
The Nationals senator John “Wacka” Williams told Radio National he believes it’s only a matter of time before a bank commission of inquiry is set up.
After the Greens upped their demands for the terms of reference, Williams said Barry O’Sullivan’s bill’s terms were “very broad and cover most things, in my opinion”, rejecting Greens’ calls to widen it to political donations.
Williams said he “couldn’t see Barry O’Sullivan backing down” and conceded it “wouldn’t be the best thing for the prime minister”.
He said:
I actually feel a bit sorry for Malcolm Turnbull here, because it is a situation where Barry is running it, others are supporting it and it does make it difficult for the prime minister. This place is all about numbers and if the numbers are there in the Senate, which I think clearly there are, if the Greens support it. It would be very surprising if they don’t support it. When it gets to the house, if the numbers put it through there then it all goes ahead.
Williams said he had been calling for a bank inquiry for seven or eight years, and said he would not be lectured by Christopher Pyne who has suggested the Nationals should call off the push because it showed disunity. He noted backbench Nationals and Liberals had a free vote.
Updated
Just on that Sam Dastyari story, here is the entire statement he released in the wake of the Fairfax Media story:
I have never been briefed by any security agency, or received any classified information about any matter, ever.
I’ve never passed on any protected security information – I’ve never been in possession of any. And as I’ve said publicly before, I would always act in accordance with any security advice I was given.
As I told Four Corners months ago: After the events of last year, I spoke to Mr Huang to tell him that I did not think it was appropriate that we have future contact. I thought it was a matter of common courtesy to say this face to face. Neither my office or I have spoken to Mr Huang since.
This information has been publicly available since June.
I reject any assertion that I did anything other than put to Mr Huang gossip being spread by journalists.
Labor has written to Mr Turnbull calling for the government to consider foreign agents register. It’s a shame that his decision to cancel Parliament has delayed its consideration.
Updated
Good morning and welcome to Politics Live
It is wonderful to be back with you after a brief sojourn covering pineapple politics in the sunshine state.
But my focus is back on Canberra and the Senate shenanigans and wow, what a time to be alive.
But before we get to the marriage equality debate, let’s take a quick look at what has been going on this morning.
North Korea has conducted a night test of a long-range ballistic missile which landed off the coast of Japan, triggering a South Korea test-launch in response and bringing a return to high tension to the region after a lull of more than two months. Donald Trump has said the US will deal with it.
Sam Dastyari’s links to Chinese donors have come back under the spotlight, with Fairfax Media reporting he met with Chinese Communist party-linked political donor Huang Xiangmo and told him his phone was probably being tapped. That was after the revelations Huang had paid a legal bill for Dastyari. The senator has released a statement through Bill Shorten’s office saying he had “never been briefed by any security agency, or received any classified information about any matter, ever”, and he wanted to tell Huang “face to face” they should not have any further contact.
And of course we are one step closer to the marriage equality bill passing the Senate. Which means the house could have at least half of today and all of tomorrow to begin debating the legislation, except of course, Malcolm Turnbull suspended the sitting. Conservative amendments designed to let all those poor bakers, florists and wedding singers say no to supplying a same-sex wedding have failed but don’t expect them to give up. Paul Karp will be following that closely for you today, so stay tuned.
A big thank you to Chris Knaus for more than holding the fort while I ran around Queensland. Mike Bowers, who was here until the very end last night to capture those final moments of the conservative amendments is back and prowling the hallways. You can follow along with him here and here. And you can reach me on Twitter at @amyremeikis, as well as in the comments.
I am on coffee number three, so strap in and let’s jump straight into it!
Updated
