After having a ring around and a prowl through the hallways, I can reliably tell you there is nothing going on.
So, I’m going to wrap up the blog here today.
Tomorrow brings Brendan Nelson’s final Press Club address. Other than that ... there is not a lot on.
Which sums up the week, actually.
But we’ll be back early tomorrow morning to bring you all of the nothing-ness, don’t you worry about that.
A massive thank-you to Mike Bowers, mostly for putting up with a pre-coffee me, and to the Guardian’s brains trust, for being my additional eyes and ears. It’s absolutely necessary.
And to you, for reading and engaging. I know we say this all the time, but thank you - you really do make it all worthwhile.
Enjoy your evening and I hope you switch off – and as always, take care of you.
Updated
Tim Storer will not be supporting the government’s latest “union accountability’ bill:
From his statement:
I am not inclined to support the Ensuring Integrity legislation at this stage.
The bill seeks to adapt the Corporations Act to align penalties against union officials with those for company directors as well as to introduce new measures in relation to union mergers.
Leaving aside the question of whether there is equivalence between companies and unions – whether like is being compared with like – the legislation goes far beyond the penalties and provisions of the Corporations Act.
To cite Parliamentary Library analysis, the bill seeks to introduce a “public interest test” in relation to union mergers. This does not apply to corporate mergers.
The bill also applies harsher penalties to unions than currently apply to disqualified company directors and is more expansive.
The bill would also enable a wide range of individuals – anyone with a “sufficient interest” – to initiate legal action against unions and union leaders.
This is not the case for companies where only ASIC can take such action.
The bill does not contain any provisions to prevent frivolous or vexatious applications to disqualify union officials. The Corporations Act does.
On the broader question of the idea of aligning unions with companies rather than incorporated associations: Companies, for example, are supposed to act in the interests of their shareholders; unions are voluntary associations established to act in the interests of their members.
I am interested to note the admissions to the Banking Royal Commission by a number of financial institutions that they repeatedly breached the law on thousands of occasions, costing ordinary people millions of dollars and personal hardship.
Just one example that springs to mind: Compare the fact that APRA failed to prosecute Colonial First State for 15,000 acknowledged breaches of the law, contrasting with the rigour with which some unions and union officials have been pursued.
I hope to see significant government focus on the unethical and illegal behaviour within the financial sector emerging from the Banking Royal Commission.
Updated
Any Liberal party staffers reading this, you have an all-staff meeting to attend.
Nola Marino has just sent out the reminder – it starts in 10 minutes.
You’re welcome.
Updated
This is the first time we have seen someone from the major parties criticise the prosecution of Citizen K – the former spy who alleged Australia was bugging the cabinet office of Timor-Leste during the multi-billion dollar gas and oil pipeline negotiations (a claim which was never denied, by either Coalition or Labor governments, in the years since) – speak up.
Katharine Murphy reports Julian Hill – most recently seen reciting the Muppets theme for the cameras – had some questions for his Labor colleagues at this morning’s caucus meeting:
The Labor MP Julian Hill has implicitly criticised the prosecution of the former spy Witness K and his lawyer, Bernard Collaery, telling caucus colleagues the attorney general has failed to justify his decision to support the legal action.
Hill raised a number of concerns about the prosecution in the Labor caucus on Tuesday in the first major-party criticism of the controversial case, which centres around the two men blowing the whistle on Australia’s spying on Timor-Leste.
The Victorian MP asked whether the shadow attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, could provide an update on the legal proceedings, and whether the case would be tried in open court.
According to people present at Tuesday’s meeting, Hill expressed concern about the ongoing failure of the attorney general, Christian Porter, to give reasons for supporting the prosecution.
You can read the whole thing here.
Updated
So it turns out that not having a lot of legislation or discernible policy to discuss sends parliament into the doldrums of boredom very quickly.
Updated
From Mike Bowers, to you:
As Gareth Hutchens just informed me, the banking royal commission is about to look at Asic.
Peter Kell’s announcement comes as the regulator comes into focus.
Updated
This statement just dropped:
Mr Peter Kell has announced his resignation as deputy chair of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), following seven years of service.
Since beginning his tenure in 2011, Mr Kell has been part of ASIC’s leadership team, first as a member and then from 2013 as Deputy Chair. His experience and understanding of corporate regulation has been appreciated by successive governments as well as members of ASIC.
Mr Kell’s time at ASIC followed a stint as Deputy Chair of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. He has also been on the Australian Government Financial Literacy Board since its establishment, has made a significant contribution to improving financial literacy and ensured that the transition to the new Chair of ASIC was as smooth as possible, including serving as Acting Chair.
ASIC has six Commissioners, with new Commissioner Danielle Press starting this week. Mr Kell’s resignation will be effective from 6 December. Sean Hughes is due to commence as a Commissioner later this year.
The Coalition Government has undertaken significant reforms to ensure that ASIC has the resources and powers it needs to combat misconduct in the financial services industry and across all corporations for the protection of Australian consumers. This includes:
- injecting a further $70.1 million into ASIC to boost its enforcement capabilities and address other regulatory priorities, in addition to $121.3 million in additional funding in 2016 to bolster ASIC’s investigative and surveillance capabilities;
- the appointment of Daniel Crennan QC as a new Deputy Chair who has a key focus on enforcement action; and
- announcing the strengthening of criminal and civil penalties by increasing terms of imprisonment and fines, increasing the maximum civil penalties that can be imposed by courts and allowing wrongdoers to be stripped of profits illegally obtained, or losses avoided, from contraventions of the law.
These reforms support ASIC’s new Chair James Shipton’s approach to increase ASIC’s strategic direction on proactive enforcement and increase onsite supervisory approaches.
The Coalition Government thanks Mr Kell for his contribution to ASIC and wishes him well in his future endeavours.
Updated
If you support #deathtodixers raise your hands:
PM Scott Morrison reprises the hands up exercise from last week, I wonder if they will be putting this to Fatman Scoop #WhoF*@kTonight @AmyRemeikis @murpharoo @GuardianAus #politicslive https://t.co/kPg3EtR5He pic.twitter.com/ze6zW7WS9Q
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) September 18, 2018
Question time ends.
Just thought you might like to know that I am being informed, by what seems half the parliament, that Julia Banks and Julie Bishop were not impressed with the latest “put your hands up” display.
I guess if you’re bemused and you know it, you throw some shade.
Updated
We are heading towards freedom ... and, once again, there is no dose of “Just how safe are you, with Peter Dutton” in the dixers.
A cynic would suggest the government doesn’t want the spotlight on him, ahead of the Senate inquiry into the au pair visa decisions being handed down, and a potential right of reply being allowed.
Updated
Bill Shorten to Scott Morrison:
(essentially – Why is Malcolm Turnbull no longer prime minister?)
Labor is attempting to trip Morrison into another “get over it” temper outburst, but he’s had some time to do his deep breathing.
Instead, he just gives examples of why Malcolm Turnbull was doing OK, as far as the government was concerned:
Morrison:
We were elected in 2013, it has been a government for the last five years, there is a period of time in which, over the last five years, a million Australians have got a job. During that time the unemployment rate has gone down. During that time, participation in the workforce has gone up, the number of Australians who have been dependent on welfare has gone down. During that time, the amount we have invested in health and education, in hospitals and schools, has all gone up. During that time, what we have invested in science and technology has increased. During that time, the deficit has come down, the economy has grown stronger.
Shorten: He is explaining why Malcolm Turnbull should still be the prime minister, I am asking why he isn’t!
Morrison: That was a big zinger!
And then Morrison is just prompted to “let’s play this game again” and he asks a bunch of questions designed to make the backbenches put their hand up.
Because there is no such thing as a tired joke in this place.
Updated
Scott Morrison is asked about Liberal party vice president Teena McQueen’s comments – that women want the spoils of victory without the fight – but that part of Catherine King’s question is ruled out of order.
Tony Smith:
One of the examples you will find in there is it’s very clear that ministers, including the prime minister, can only be asked questions on matters for which they are responsible. The prime minister is not responsible for the vice president of the Victorian division of the Liberal party.”
Scott Morrison takes the rest on bullying though:
“I’m very happy to address the answer and I stand by my comments about matters that fall within the ambit of the federal parliamentary party of the Liberal party, which is what I’m responsible for as leader of the federal parliamentary party.
“By contrast, the federal leader of the Labor party said he knew nothing about an investigation in his own party in western Sydney where one of his own members was being dragged under the bus, Mr Speaker, on a daily basis.
“I’ll tell you what I’m also proud to be part of, I’m proud to be part of our government that’s invested $300m in women’s safety since 2015. I’m proud to be part of a government that’s invested $100m in a women’s safety package announced in September 2015. The package focused on practical and immediate action to keep women and children safe, improving training for frontline workers, enhancing service to radical areas and providing educational resources to change attitudes. $100m for the third action plan … $100m for the national plan to reduce violence against women and their families from 2010-22, $82m in the budget that I brought down for assistance services and reform to family law. $54 million in the 2018-19 budget that I brought down for women affected by violence, and for online safety initiatives.
“Mr Speaker, our government stands by our record for standing up for women who have been affected by family violence, and all sorts of violence, Mr Speaker. People who look and see what we’ve done, all they can look at Labor doing is see what they say. People will believe a government that’s getting on with the job and protecting women, investing in programs to defend women and to support women who are in situations of family violence.
“That’s our record of our government, Mr Speaker, from the day we were elected in 2013 until now. The women of Australia can be guaranteed on our part that we will deliver for their safety every single day we have the opportunity to do so.”
Updated
Tanya Plibersek to Scott Morrison:
“I refer to his answers about bullying in his government. The minister for women said ministers were subject to threats, intimidation and bullying. More than a quarter of Liberal MPs and senators agreed. Today the prime minister said he was 100% confident bullying was not an issue in his government, does the prime minister stand by his answer? Is he telling the minister, the members of Chisholm, member for Curtin and others that the bullying didn’t happen?”
Morrison:
“As I remarked earlier, when I’ve engaged with my team about this, the issues they raised went to matters within the party organisation. I’ve requested the party organisation put in place a process that can deal confidentially, rigorously to deal with complaints in the party organisation.
“The way these issues are dealt with are through the party whips and the member for Forrest has been doing the job for 11 years outstandingly, she does well to care for the members of this house with the whips, and that’s the same process as the member for Sydney has acknowledged occurs when it comes to the Labor party in this place as well.
“And, Mr Speaker, it only begs the question that they’re entitled to come and put these matters, of course, Mr Speaker, but they need to look at what’s happening in their own case.
“The ALP candidate for Hasluck quit as the candidate in July of this year amid an outbreak of factional warfare within the party, and despite the former ALP candidate citing health reasons for her withdrawal, one source said Miss Palmer had been led into resigning and had been treated badly by those opposite, some of whom believed she was running a poor campaign.
“Another Labor source said her candidacy was never embraced by many senior Labor figures in WA.
“I suspect the blokes, especially those in the powerful leftwing United Voice union, Mr Speaker. I welcome her back to the chamber … The leader of the opposition couldn’t even bring himself to acknowledge that there are issues going on within Lindsey. He had the ‘I know nothing’ defence, Mr Speaker. The member for Grayndler knew all about it, I’m sure the member for Watson knew all about it, the member for McMahon knew all about it, I suspect the member for Sydney knew all about it. What was it? The leader of the opposition position, as usual his ears were painted on when it came to listening to the concerns of his own members and indeed the concerns of the Australian people.”
Updated
Education minister Dan Tehan talks to Julie Bishop during #qt @AmyRemeikis @murpharoo @GuardianAus #politicslive https://t.co/kPg3EtR5He pic.twitter.com/lVF3qTThkj
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) September 18, 2018
The only badge I will accept in parliament from now on is one that declares: “I survived another dixer which could have been a press release” because for goodness sake.
Updated
Julie Collins to Ken Wyatt:
“Does the minister accept the sorts of abuses screened last night on Four Corners were occurring when he was rejecting the calls for a royal commission? Minister what has changed?”
Wyatt:
“When I was interviewed on Four Corners I did indicate, I had not supported the royal commission at that point. I indicated we were undertaking significant reforms with the legislation we were passing through the chamber, in respect to the quality.
“I then received from my own agency, information on the Aged Care Regulation Quality Agency provided details of the number of complaints that had risen significantly, they also raised an issue that was absolutely important, the issue was, serious risks found. In the first year there were only two, and the second year, there were 22, in the third year, 61.
“When you get information like that, you drill down and you seek the information that sees what is those matters that are important. And looking at that, I then spoke with the prime minister, and, on the basis, when we do have the right evidence and information, we have an obligation to change our mind. I changed my mind on the basis that I care about senior Australians, and I want them cared for in aged care, while we can politic, we can politic, the bottom line are senior Australians.
“If they are at risk, and if they are in crisis because they are not being cared for, we have a problem. I am talking about individuals, the other point I want to make, very clear, up to 40% of senior Australians in aged care do not have a single visitor 365 days of the year. Who looks after them? What I want is to make sure that with our government, we get to the bottom of the issues that are not right.
“This royal commission will do that, so we should not preempt, the work of the royal commission, we will continue to make the reforms that we are working on, closely with the sector, we are working closely and co-designing, developing the responses and bringing the sector with us. Yesterday I engaged with the aged care sector committee for some period of time to talk to them about the raft of issues, this morning the prime minister and I met with the committee and stave true, we sought from the MD views and advice on a range of issues, they have big knowledge and welcomed the royal commission, I would continue to consult, along with Minister Hunt, with key providers, whose advice we will see, because we intend to make sure the quality and safety of senior Australians is cared for.”
Updated
My colleague Gareth Hutchens has reminded me of the birth of “fair dinkum power” which I assume is like the power of Grayskull, but better because it’s fuelled by Alf from Home and Away and Steve Irwin’s legacy.
Scott Morrison's phrase "fair dinkum power" has been getting a run today.
— Gareth Hutchens (@grhutchens) September 18, 2018
But the birth of the instant #Auspol classic occurred on 3 September, during an interview with 2GB's Alan Jones.
It was a beautiful dialectical moment pic.twitter.com/yaLR4rKVMi
Updated
Julie Collins comes back to ask – when did he “first become aware of the abuses screened on Four Corners last night?”
Ken Wyatt:
“Can I say on the Four Corners program, I was aware the ABC following Oakden South Australia, that started to interview and speak to senior Australians who had raised with the issues about quality of care in aged care facilities. If I remember back and recall back to Oakden, there was a series of stories that 7.30 did come out of the Northern Territory initially, out of a couple of other locations, stories around the quality of care that was not being provided to senior Australians.
“The specific stories last night on Four Corners I was not aware of, I did not have the specificity of detail on that, I was interviewed by Four Corners, they asked me a range of questions to do with the way in which aged care is provided to senior Australians, they talked about a range of issues to do with quality of food, incidents, the quality agency, there were numerous other matters they explored with me.
“They also mentioned, they had received 4,000 responses from Australians across the nation, what I noticed last night, Four Corners started by acknowledging the prime minister had called for a royal commission, which they welcomed.
“That was important because they recognised, equally from their stories, and from the information they had, there is something wrong in the system, when I look at those incidents last night, for all three families, there are things that would not have been picked up by the quality agency had they gone. There are elements around that. I am not fear-mongering, member of the opposition. I think, the bipartisan approach, is critical, the leader of the opposition in what we do.
“I did make comments at the time and I acknowledge yesterday, it was based on a set of [circumstances], a point in time and a set of circumstances to which I responded. On this, this is absolutely important, that we continue to focus on the safety and quality of life of Australians within aged care, I was quite disturbed by those stories last night, I did not expect to see Australians in aged care who had been trusted with the care of providers to be given those experiences we saw.
“Let me say, all of us have to think about making sure, the issue is to do with all of us making sure, the quality of care to anybody in a facility in this nation, including home care, is provided at the highest level.”
Updated
Julie Collins to Ken Wyatt:
“The Australian Aged Care Quality Agency recorded a tripling of concerns that accreditation standards were not being met in the last few years. Given the minister is responsible for overseeing the agency and has been for over 30 months, what warnings did he receive about the type of poor care and treatment revealed on Four Corners and when did he receive them?”
Wyatt:
“Since becoming involved in the portfolio, I have frequently been in and out of aged care facilities across this nation, so I’ve become aware of incidents as they occur. When you talk to people locally, having met with families who been affected, as I have done, I’ve met with [I miss the name], for example, I listened to the issues she raised. I meet regularly with the quality agency and in doing so, we talk about the reports that are critical to those matters that I have referred to the quality agency.
“In that time within the portfolio, particularly following Oakden, what I did is I set about insuring that we would make changes to the commission, that we would bring together the aged care and components under one commission that would seek to be more expedient and efficient in dealing with critical issues.
“I have kept myself across the issues … In South Australia, the member for Hindmarsh has worked closely with his community, he has raised issues with make. Leon Viner has interviewed me and I have said each time that the matters raised will be addressed by the government, we will follow through and we will make sure people are taken care of in times of crisis. I met with the families from Oakden.
“Senator Xenophon brought them to Parliament House. I met with them and listened to their issues. What I was very keen to do was to make sure that our government would focus on ensuring quality was in place for all Australians, hence the legislation that we have passed through this chamber, both … It doesn’t matter, each time, member for Franklin, when issues are being raised with me, we have acted.
“Let me say, when we had the Carnell-Patterson review, the review was announced on the 1 May 2017. The report came to me on the 2 October 2017 and it was released on 25 October. I immediately announced unannounced reaccreditation audits would apply to every age care facilities of none of them would prepare in advance. Age care quality and safety commission is established and is being established, improving regulation of aged care quality. Strengthening aged care compliance.
“A single quality framework. The legislative review, we are acting on them. They are all focusing on better care and better opportunities for Australians. Let me say that we will continue to tackle those issues and incidents as they arise. Oakden was the most significant because it was the most public in the reporting on two reports, one undertaken by the chief psychiatrist, the other undertaken by a barrister, the IEEE said. We have continued to make sure that the reforms we are putting in place continue to have the level of impact that is needed.”
Updated
Angus Taylor picked up one of the prime minister’s new favourite lines in his answer:
Here was Scott Morrison this morning, when talking to Ray Hadley about energy policy:
To see how we can get greater investment in what I call ‘fair dinkum power’; that’s the stuff that works when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow.”
And here is what Angus Taylor just said:
“We’re going to back investment in fair dinkum reliable generation because that’s what this country needs.”
Fair. Dinkum. Power.
This is where we are now at. I have fair dinkum seen a potato power a light, so I would love to know what un-fair dinkum power is.
Updated
While Michael McCormack answers his latest dixer and strips away more of what remains of my will to live, here is the whole question from Adam Bandt:
Investment in renewables in 2018 and 2019 is at record highs and even the Reserve Bank has said this investment pipeline will bring down prices.
“As the PM has acknowledged, it’s the renewable energy target driving this investment in new generation while also cutting pollution.
“But the RET runs out in 2020 and there is currently no policy to take its place, which threatens investment decisions being made right now.
“To stop renewables falling into a valley of death while parliament works out a new energy policy, will you agree to the Greens’ proposal of a ‘stop-gap’ extension of the RET out to 2022?
“Or is your goal to be the grim reaper for renewable energy by letting renewables fall into the valley of death?”
The crossbench gets longer to ask their questions, which is known as the Katter rule, after the Queensland MP repeatedly failed to get his question in under 30 seconds.
Updated
Angus Taylor with a rare piece of naked truth in question time!
In response to Adam Bandt’s question about renewable energy, and the end of the RET – and what will happen then – Taylor comes back with this.
Of course, the truth of the matter is the renewable energy target is going to wind down from 2020, it reaches its peak in 2020, and we won’t be replacing that with anything. We know that ...”
I’ll remind you that ministers get crossbencher questions ahead of time, so they can answer them fully.
Merit, indeed.
Updated
It’s another Schrodinger’s cat argument, as Julie Collins asks Scott Morrison about cuts to aged care:
“In his first budget as treasurer of the prime minister cut $1.2bn from aged care funding instrument which determines the level of funding paid to aged care providers, the latest leaked report in the media today reveals the government is considering further cuts to the aged care funding instrument of $5.4bn. Can the prime minister rule out having had any discussions, or received any documentation canvassing further changes to the aged care funding instrument?”
Morrison:
“They can say these things as much as they want but they still remain untrue. The Australian public are used to Labor telling untruths about the aged care sector.
“Mr Speaker, they were measures supported by the opposition. They were passed through the parliament and when in the Senate, the Greens actually sought to change them, they voted with the government to support them. The reason they did that is because in their own budget, here it is, budget paper, the member for Lilley will remember this, 2012-13, budget paper number two, that was the … page 184, makes it very clear that the Labor party engaged in making changes to the aged care funding instrument to the tune of about $1.6bn, Mr Speaker.
“I tell you what this government is doing, what this government is doing is investing $1bn extra every year in aged care in this country. This government has added an additional 20,000 places in the last 12 months alone for in-home care, which means older Australians can exercise their choice to remain in their home for longer, Mr Speaker. Now, I met two of those this morning in Canberra, Mr Speaker, and what they had to tell me was that this was a game changer for them to be able to stay in their own home. In high-level care packages, we are taking level three and four packages from just under $40,000 or thereabouts to around $74,000 over the next four years. That’s an 86% increase or thereabouts in the level of in-home care places being provided by this government.
“The Labor party can lie all they like about these things, but we won’t cop their lies or their untruths. We will tell the truth about what is needed in aged care funding, we will tell the truth about what is needed for the royal commission into aged care, Mr Speaker. We’re establishing that royal commission to ensure we can get to the facts. We’re not afraid of the facts and we’re not afraid to confront those facts and deal with them when they come back and we will continue to act for the needs of senior Australians every day.”
But he doesn’t rule out the reported cut.
Updated
Opposition leader Bill Shorten is sporting his own lapel badge today in #qt @AmyRemeikis @murpharoo @GuardianAus #politicslive https://t.co/kPg3EtR5He pic.twitter.com/jPKaymK3pw
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) September 18, 2018
While Josh Frydenberg does his best to deliver yet another dixer which should have been a press release, let’s take a look at Labor’s line of questioning.
It comes from this story in the Australian, by Rick Morton:
The treasurer’s office has sought urgent advice from two government ministers about whether the Coalition cut $2 billion from direct aged-care funding and the dementia supplement, almost a week after cabinet signed off on a royal commission into aged care.
“On Sunday night, five hours after Scott Morrison was asked about cutting the aged care funding instrument, an email from Josh Frydenberg’s office was sent to health minister Greg Hunt and aged care minister Ken Wyatt’s advisers seeking more answers.
“The Australian can reveal the Coalition has been considering a review of the ACFI, which would save between $3.3bn and $5.4bn over four years on top of the $2bn shaved off in 2015 and 2016 when Mr Morrison was treasurer.
“However, new treasurer Mr Frydenberg was not across the detail of that policy, even after reading the government’s release.”
It was Morton who got into the skirmish with Scott Morrison at the Sunday press conference announcing the royal commission.
Updated
It’s amazing how often politicians are “not going to be lectured” by someone, following Julia Gillard’s proclamation.
Updated
Chris Bowen to Scott Morrison:
“I refer to the previous answer and the media reports that quote the treasurer was not across the detail of that policy. Has the prime minister asked his department to arrange a briefing so the treasurer can understand the extent of the government cuts to aged care, and when the treasurer admits he’s not across the detail of the policy, is this why the prime minister describes his own government as The Muppet Show?”
Morrison:
“It’s a bit rich from the shadow treasurer. He did not know what the tax-free threshold was. He doesn’t know the difference between the ... It is a bit rich from a shadow treasurer who once proclaimed about the surpluses delivered by the previous Labor government as he went to his electorate claiming the great fiscal responsibility of the previous government that left, Mr Speaker, the Australian fiscal situation with great parlance.
“We are not going to take lectures from a failed shadow treasurer, from a failed immigration minister, when he’s served and allowed 25,000 people to turn up the legally in this country on his watch. The shadow treasurer was one of the greatest ministerial failures of the previous government, Mr Speaker, I cannot tell you, one member of that frontbench that did a good job in the last government, Mr Speaker, that’s a pretty good reason why they shouldn’t be returned to government.
Updated
Scott Morrison is reading almost all of this dixer straight from the paper in front of him.
You know what would be better? Sending that out as a statement and allowing backbenchers to ask questions their communities actually care about.
Updated
Question time begins
Bill Shorten to Scott Morrison:
“Is he aware of a leaked email from the treasurer’s office which contains, further questions from the treasurer. It goes on to ask if it is correct that the now prime minister cut billions from aged care? And has the prime minister briefed the treasurer on his 2016 budget which confirms the now prime minister cup $1.2bn from aged care?”
Morrison:
“Mr Speaker, once again the reason I am seeking to establish and will be establishing a royal commission on the aged care sector, is so, we can have a discussion, a serious discussion about what is needed in the aged care sector, based on fact is.
Based on facts, Mr Speaker, not based on the lies of the Labor party, on the agendas of others, so all of these things can be put aside, we can focus on the needs of senior Australians, in the most urgent time of vulnerability, and need. Once again, the Labor party has raised this issue of the decisions taken in the 2016 budget, 2012 budget, exactly the same decision, taken by the Labor party, in relation to the aged care funding instrument, to make sure, to make sure, the proper assessments were being made, and estimations of demands were not being built into future budgets, there was a variation of $1.6bn by the Labor party in the 2012 budget.
“Mr Speaker, I am not making any claims about that, I understand how the model works, I have put budgets together, three good budgets, in fact, Mr Speaker. Which is reducing the deficit, bringing the budget back into balance and funding the central services, especially for aged care which is increasing by $1bn every single year under our government. The Labor party may want to engage in political tactics in this chamber, but they are telling senior Australians is they are more interested in politics than looking after aged care.”
Updated
It’s the downhill slide to question time … so who is that MP as we flick over to the chamber?
It’s …
Rob Mitchell.
Updated
Scott Morrison began proceedings.
He said his government was starting to get some momentum after being in power for a few weeks.
He touched on the Wentworth byelection. He said Dave Sharma was an “outstanding candidate.” He said he wanted to see more women preselected but he also always wanted to see the best person get the job, too. He mentioned how intelligent Sharma was. He also indicated he’d be campaigning hard in the byelection.
He told his colleagues that Labor now had two candidates in Wentworth (which is the line they’ll be running every day until 20 October).
“There’s Bill Shorten’s actual candidate, who probably can’t win, which is why the Labor party now has a different candidate in Kerryn Phelps,” Morrison said.
“She’s clearly not a Liberal, quite the opposite, even with a Labor party campaign manager running her campaign.”
Michael McCormack, the deputy prime minister, then took the stand.
He told his colleagues that the Australian people already preferred Scott Morrison to Bill Shorten. [Ed: so the government does take note of polls?]
Josh Frydenberg reminded his colleagues how well the economy was doing.
General issues:
Three MPs then spoke about the royal commission into the aged care sector, saying it was a good idea. It was stressed how important it was to get the terms of reference right so the commission can address the challenges we face as the population ages and the number of older Australians grows quickly.
At least four MPs spoke about vaping, with mixed views about the laws. Some highlighted international laws that are making vaping more available, while others warned vaping can become an entry point for young people to begin smoking proper.
One MP talked about future discussions that will occur about the Ruddock report on religious freedom. The MP stressed that those discussions should be framed in the context of freedom of speech and freedom of conscience.
[This is interesting. Last week when Morrison appeared on 2GB with Alan Jones he said the issue, for him, was all about freedom of religion and belief, which he also spoke about last night on Paul Murray Live.]
Updated
Anne Davies has reported Philip Ruddock has been sent in, in a bid to boost the Liberals fortunes in Wentworth:
The Liberal party has sent one of its most senior figures to urge the former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull to either return to Australia to assist the Wentworth campaign or at least publicly endorse his replacement, Dave Sharma.
One of the party’s elder statesmen, the former federal MP Philip Ruddock,who is in New York to campaign for the Rohingya people, has asked to see Turnbull and will urge him to help.
Ruddock told Guardian Australia from New York that he had been in touch with Turnbull but did not yet have an arrangement, though as former colleagues they were likely to catch up.
Concetta Fierravanti-Wells says she wouldn’t want to be called a ‘quota girl’ – politics liveRead more
“In my view obviously it would be better to have everyone in the tent than not, but that’s for Malcolm to consider. I think it would positive,” he said. “The decision will be his, not mine.”
Jordon Steele-John is continuing to campaign for disability care abuse to be included in the aged care royal commission.
He said this is the opportunity to examine an area which has been largely ignored - but desperately needs a spotlight on it.
“It is now time for the Liberal party, and Labor, to get on board with this as well,” he tells Sky.
Scott Morrison did start the day with an attempt to talk policy - he visited a Canberra home where the residents receive an at home care package:
Our government is 100 per cent focused on ensuring that older Australians, senior Australians can age with dignity, keep their choices, stay in their homes and have the choices to live their life the way they want to do it. We’ve got a lot of work to do. The Royal Commission into aged care will be also looking at the in-home age care places, as of course it will be dealing with young people living with disabilities in residential age care. It is a very focused inquiry, it’s important that we keep the focus of the inquiries. If they become an inquiry into everything, they become too broad. I want to ensure that this inquiry remains very focused so it can give us some very clear direction. Everything else will continue to keep happening, we’re going to walk and chew gum, aren’t we Ken [Wyatt].”
I was unable to transcribe this, this morning because I was too busy trying to pull my eyeballs the right way round after they rolled too far back in my skull, but here is the public make up between Ray Hadley and Scott Morrison:
Ray Hadley: He did a fantastic job as Immigration Minister and one of the architects of Border Protection. He’s now the boss, número uno and he’s on the line. Prime Minister, good morning.
Morrison: G’day Ray, nice to be talking.
Hadley: It’s been a while.
Morrison: It’s been a while mate.
[Laughter]
HADLEY: I was only thinking about you the other day. You know the stunt you pulled with the coal in Parliament?
Morrison: Yeah?
Hadley: You weren’t channelling me at that particular stage, with stunts? I’ve pulled a couple of stunts, including one with you one day. You weren’t thinking about me when you produced the coal illegally inside Parliament, were you?
Morrison: Mate, it was a while ago now but my view hasn’t changed. It’s a big part of Australia’s energy future.
That ‘stunt’ Hadley is referring to, happened in 2015, when Hadley demanded Morrison swear on a bible after the Malcolm Turnbull leadership coup against Tony Abbott (which Morrison supported) and then again, last year, when Hadley banned him from the program, after Morrison committed the great sin of speaking to ABC Melbourne radio.
Quick briefing about the party room and the caucus
As time is marching on, let me give you a quick helicopter view of the Coalition party room and the Labor caucus.
Caucus
There was another debate in caucus today about the TPP. Left-winger Doug Cameron moved a motion to overturn last week’s decision to support the trade agreement. There was a debate. The motion was defeated on the voices. Another motion was moved by left-winger Gavin Marshall about the lack of compliance with Labor’s platform. That was defeated too. This debate gives you a warm up to a more full throated debate that will play out about trade at the ALP national conference later this year. There was also an interesting conversation about the prosecution of Witness K.
Coalition
In the Coalition party room there were debates about why the government is moving to regulate expiry dates on gift cards (this one got quite lively), a discussion on aged care, and another discussion on vaping (lots of MPs supportive including Trent Zimmerman and Eric Abetz on a rare unity ticket, the health minister Greg Hunt not so much).
In terms of the reports of the party leaders: Scott Morrison attempted to generate some buy in after a bruising few weeks. This is our government, the prime minister said, and we have to own it.
Bill Shorten told colleagues the voters were taking a second look at Labor. They had taken some water over some brave policy decisions (presumably the ones raising revenue), but there would be lots of good news between now and December, he said.
I missed this yesterday, because I was caught up with the Ann Sudmalis’s resignation and statement, but Rex Patrick from Centre Alliance managed a pretty spectacular feat yesterday - he managed to get all of the Senate crossbench to support a motion, standing against the government, for the production of documents in relation to the Great Barrier Reef Foundation fund.
I move: (1) That the Senate notes that:
(a) on 21 August 2018, the Senate agreed to an order for the production of documents directed at the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Energy for documents relating to the grant of $444 million to the Great Barrier Reef Foundation (the Foundation), including documents demonstrating due diligence was carried out on the Foundation;
(b) on 10 September 2018, the duty minister tabled the index to a due diligence report prepared by the Australian Government Solicitor but did not table the body of the report, making a public interest immunity claim of legal professional privilege;
(c) to the extent that the report fulfils a due diligence task, it cannot be characterised as legal advice and, therefore, cannot attract the privilege – it is noted the document comprised largely information that is available online free of charge or for a nominal fee, such as company details, insolvency notice search results, media searches, ASIC personal name search results, and AUSTLII case searches;
(d) the Senate does not accept legal professional privilege as a basis for a claim of public interest immunity unless it is established that there is some particular harm to be apprehended by the disclosure of the information;
(e) in Egan v Chadwick, Chief Justice Spigelman held that “in performing its accountability function, the Legislative Council may require access to legal advice on the basis of which the Executive acted, or purported to act...access to such advice will be relevant in order to make an informed assessment of the justification for the Executive decision. In my opinion, access to legal advice is reasonably necessary for the exercise by the Legislative Council of its functions”;
and (f) as a country that upholds the rule of law, the Government must not rely on conventions, no matter how longstanding, that are contrary to established principles in law.
(2) That the Senate does not accept the public interest immunity claim made by the then Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Energy (Senator Birmingham) in relation to the due diligence report prepared by the Australian Government Solicitor, and requires the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment to table the due diligence report, in accordance with the order for the production of documents agreed to by the Senate on 21 August 2018, with any appropriate redactions where there is some particular harm to be apprehended, accompanied by a properly made out claim for public interest immunity identifying the harm.
The ayes won it, 40 to 26, with all of the crossbench sitting in the yes side, with Labor and the Greens.
I forgot this earlier, but the PMO just sent out the transcript and reminded me - Scott Morrison was on Paul Murray overnight.
His response to Ann Sudmalis’s resignation was:
I’ve been supporting Ann for a long time, ever since she’s been in the Parliament. We are good mates and I know her part of the world very, very well. I’ve got a lot of family who live down that way and Jo Gash before her was a great member and they were good friends as well.
But you know sometimes people, they can find this job just a bit too much at times without that support locally from some of the local Party members that she’s identified. That’s unfortunate, that’s really a matter for the Party organisation to sort out. I’d love to see Ann continue, but you’ve got to respect the decisions people make. She’s a good mate, I wish her all the best. I know she’s going to remain here and work hard for her constituents between now and the next election when the Party will be going forward to select a new candidate there in the seat of Gilmore. As you know, it’s a very tight seat, it always has been. But it’s been well-served by the Liberal Party going back to when Jo Gash first won the seat back from Labor many, many years ago.”
And on religious freedoms:
Let me give you this example. I send my kids to a Christian school, I think that Christian school should be able to ensure they can provide education consistent with the Christian faith and teaching that I believe as a parent. That’s why I’m sending them there. I don’t think that school should be told who they can and can’t employ, or have restrictions on them in ensuring that they’re delivering to me – the parent, their client, their customer – what I’ve invested in for my children’s education.
Here’s another one. Let’s say you have some particular religious views about something or other that’s deeply held within your faith. It doesn’t contravene national laws or anything like this and a company has a particular policy which doesn’t sit well with your view. You’re a totally competent person to sit on that board of a public company. Why should you be denied a directorship or a partnership, indeed in a law firm or an accountancy firm, just because you happened to have expressed on Facebook or somewhere about a particular religious belief? That shouldn’t happen in this country. Now, I’m not saying it is, necessarily and people say; “Oh well, if there’s not this great problem, why do you need to do it?” Can they guarantee me it won’t happen in the future? I’ve seen where this issue has gone over the last ten years and issues of freedom of speech, I’ve seen where they’ve gone over the last ten years.
Not quite sure I’m pleased with the trajectory. So there’s nothing wrong with a bit of preventative regulation and legislation to ensure that your religious freedom in this country. I mean, what’s more fundamental that that?”
I guess that’s totally fine, as long as your view is not that you don’t want to stand for the national anthem.
Back at the reef foundation hearings, foundation chair John Schubert has told the inquiry Turnbull and Frydenberg gave him some detail during the April 9 meeting of what the partnership would entail.
He said the $443.8 million figure was discussed “fairly early on in the meeting” as well as the plan for that to be broken down into items such as $100m for science projects and about $200m for water quality.
But he said he did not get a sense of whose idea it was.
“No, I didn’t get a feel for where it started,” he said.
He said during the meeting he had considered whether the small foundation had the capacity to take on such a large grant.
“That was the second thing that went through my mind when this was mentioned.
And I very quickly came to the conclusion that although this was really significant growth, no question, that with the connections we have, with the quality of our board, with all the organisations that we’re associated with, that we could actually do this,” Schubert said.
The only person I have heard use the term ‘quota girl’ is Eric Abetz.
Wouldn't want to be a 'quota girl'
Connie Fierravanti-Wells appeared on Sky to argue against quotas:
Politics is a numbers game and in the end ... it is about numbers, but it is also about ensuring the best person, or a person is chosen in a particular seat that is going to suit that seat.
Now, I have seen plenty of women who have put up their hand – some have been preselected, some haven’t been preselected, but can I just say, I don’t want to be sitting in parliament knowing that I am only there to make up the numbers.
I don’t want to be referred to as a ‘quota girl’, I want to be there because I have earned my place in the parliament, because yes, I have worked the numbers, yes I am capable, yes I have got there on merit.
Updated
The bells are ringing, marking the beginning of the parliament session for today.
I’m sure everyone is just rushing into the Senate, they have SO much work to do.
Oh, and whoever thought “ebbs and flows” was a great answer for the “What’s up with the lack of women in your party?” for the talking notes, might have thought about how that actually sounds in real life.
Particularly when women have mostly been preselected for marginal seats, in a climate where the polls tell us the election is going to be pretty tough for the Coalition to win.
It’s popped up a bit from Coalition MPs this morning, and it doesn’t sound great coming out of anyone’s mouth.
Updated
The numbers
My eyes are going a bit crossed-eyed, as I do some of the math(s) (it truly has never been a strong point – hence the word game).
But further to Steve Ciobo’s animated defence of the Coalition’s track record on women, he brought up, quite a bit, that 58% of women cabinet ministers have come from the Coalition.
Looking at the election records since 1949, when Enid Lyons, first elected in 1943 representing the United Australia party (a precursor to the Liberal party), became the first woman to reach cabinet status.
Since then, the Coalition has won 18 of the last 26 elections. Which would probably account for more women cabinet ministers, given there have been more Coalition cabinets.
Tom Connell from Sky also did some numbers: he says Labor has had 223 women representatives, while the Coalition has had 145, since 1996.
Updated
State Liberal MP Gareth Ward has spent the morning defending himself against Ann Sudmalis’s speech:
Well, obviously, I disagree with those allegations and Ann has decided to leave politics and has said some things on the way out. Obviously I wish her all the best. Politics can be a robust game. Sometimes we have discussions internally. Sometimes I don’t always agree … with my federal colleagues. We have debates that are appropriate. People shouldn’t conflate the two issues. Internal democracy within the Liberal party is not necessarily bullying. I think they are two very, very [different] things.”
Updated
Further to Steve Ciobo’s interview this morning, here is how the major political parties have gone when it comes to female representation:
TIL: Labor introduced the 35 per cent female MP representation rule in 1994. Here is what happened after #auspol pic.twitter.com/0034ZdHNU8
— Eryk Bagshaw (@ErykBagshaw) September 17, 2018
The most excellent Parliamentary Library have also done a lot of research in this space. You’ll find plenty of resources, here
Party room meetings are going on, as usual, this morning.
We’ll bring you what, if anything, comes from those.
Lisa Cox is listening to the Great Barrier Reef Foundation grant hearing. She reports:
The foundation’s chair John Schubert has said the first he was aware of proposed grant was in the meeting with former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull and the then environment and energy minister Josh Frydenberg on 9 April.
He said two other staff members – one from Turnbull’s office and one from Frydenberg’s – were present but no officials from the department of environment and energy.
“Did the prime minister take control and tell you why you were there?” senator Peter Whish-Wilson asked.
“Yes, fortunately, because I didn’t know” Schubert said.
Updated
The Senate inquiry hearing into the Great Barrier Reef $444m grant has begun.
Here is what Kristina Keneally, who has really led the charge on bringing this to the attention of the parliament, and public, had to say heading into the room:
Today, for the first time, the Australian Senate, and the Australian public, gets to hear from one of the people who was in the room. John Schubert, the chair of the Great Barrier Reef Foundation, will come before the Senate inquiry today. This will be an opportunity for the Australian public to hear from one of those three people that was in the room – what actually transpired. How it came to be that Malcolm Turnbull felt that he could just give away half-a-billion dollars of public money without any due diligence, without any grant application, without any tender process – just handed away to this private foundation.
Now, Josh Frydenberg was minister for the environment at that time – he is now the treasurer, and he still has questions to answer as how it came to be that he felt quite comfortable, without any due diligence, giving away nearly half-a-billion dollars of public money. Now, the Senate inquiry has been able to uncover that this was done without a grant process, without a tender process. We have been unable to uncover that there was no public servant in the room. Today, we finally get to hear from one of the three people who was in the room.
We will also be asking the board of the Great Barrier Reef Foundation about their fundraising capacity, about the money that they plan to spend this year, and about their links to big companies that deal in fossil fuels and are reliant on coal and carbon-emitting industries, and their relationships with the big banks. This is a private foundation backed-in by some of the biggest carbon emitters in the country, and it is now time for us to hear from the Great Barrier Reef Foundation. How it is that they’re going to manage those conflicts of interest, as they have been gifted nearly half-a-billion dollars of public money to be spent on one our greatest public assets – the Great Barrier Reef.
Updated
Anyone who is not following Craig Laundy as he continues to troll his colleagues on Twitter, is missing out:
Chilly morning in Canberra. Heading off to another party room meeting. Hope they fire up - they've been so boring of late 😉😉😉 #auspol
— Craig Laundy (@LaundyCraigMP) September 17, 2018
As Mark Twain once wrote “truth is stranger than fiction...” #youcantmakethisstuffup 🤔#auspol https://t.co/POUI6NiXaq
— Craig Laundy (@LaundyCraigMP) September 16, 2018
What do you reckon I thought when I saw this headline this morning?! #Dejavu 😏 #auspol https://t.co/TA35SuCZkQ
— Craig Laundy (@LaundyCraigMP) September 14, 2018
So not only has the government asked the Senate to debate a speech made two and a bit years ago, yesterday, it also fought against motions to bring on votes for legislation Labor agreed with.
Twice.
Despite Labor voting for legislation (modern slavery and an amendment to a treasury law from memory), giving the government the numbers, because no one really disagreed with it, the government voted to continue the debate, and then filibustered the motions to pad out even more time.
Things should get back to normal soon, when the government starts submitting legislation again. But pulling the company tax legislation, and the Neg, and then having a leadership change does tend to screw up the Senate supply chain a little.
Everything is fine and normal.
Here is Teena McQueen, the new federal Liberal vice president, who replaced Trish Worth, a moderate at the last federal conference, after Worth lost the vote, explaining women need to “put up or shut up” on last night’s Bolt report.
“I’ve said this before, Andrew, women always want the spoils of victory without the fight.
“And I think that’s something when you enter politics, as a woman, you have to fight for philosophies, for principles, fight for a spot. I mean, it’s a continuing fight.
“So you must have that DNA in you, to be in politics.”
WATCH: Vice president of the federal Liberal Party, Teena McQueen, on quotas for women in politics, “Women always want the spoils of victory, without the fight.” #theboltreport @SkyNewsAust
— The Bolt Report (@theboltreport) September 17, 2018
MORE: https://t.co/tvZHfCYbox pic.twitter.com/FJkMrpGlHR
Now, in addressing the problem the Liberal party doesn’t have – because the prime minister is “100% sure” there is no bullying problem within the federal ranks, and Steve Ciobo is also sure of that, so it’s all fine – Scott Morrison was asked about Kelly O’Dwyer’s insistence any resolution process needed to be independent.
O’Dwyer mentioned that the process needed to be independent again yesterday, after Morrison said it would be confidential and rigorous.
Asked today if he agreed it should also be independent, Morrison said “that’s what a rigorous process is, yes”.
rigorous adjectiverig·or·ous | \ ˈri-g(ə-)rəs \
Definition of Rigorous
1: manifesting, exercising, or favoring rigor : very strict
2a: marked by extremes of temperature or climate
3: scrupulously accurate : PRECISE
Updated
Update: “continuity and stability” is the new “continuity with change”.
Updated
For those who like to hear it straight from the horse’s mouth, here’s that totally normal, and completely reasonable response to the Liberal’s problem with female representation:
.@Kieran_Gilbert: You do not have a strong track record of female representation. @StevenCiobo: You are wrong. The Liberal Party has a strong track record of women representation. In fact, it is stronger than Labor’s.
— Sky News Australia (@SkyNewsAust) September 17, 2018
MORE: https://t.co/UwC6P4Pba1 #amagenda pic.twitter.com/GO102SfrzZ
Ray Hadley and Scott Morrison have officially made up – the prime minister is having a grand chat with his old mate on 2GB right now.
The Bromance is back on.
Updated
Reading into the code Roman Quaedvlieg tweets in, has given me some insight into the headaches Alan Turing must have suffered.
In other news, we should find out if Quaedvlieg gets his right of reply against Peter Dutton later this week. We should also see the outcome of the Senate inquiry into Dutton’s visa approvals for the au pairs later this week as well.
Just when I’d taken off my raincoat another shower passes across, but this one has the scent of current spring and pending summer. https://t.co/BQ0OyYGZ8f
— Roman Quaedvlieg (@quaedvliegs) September 17, 2018
Over in the Senate, it looks like the government has listed the address-in-Rreply to governor general Peter Cosgrove’s opening speech for debate today.
That would be the speech that the GG gives when he opens a new parliament for the first time. It’s been just over two years since the speech was delivered. But better late than never, I suppose.
A cynic would suggest it was listed now, because the government was running out of business in the Senate, what with the lack of legislation and all, since pulling the Neg and tax bills.
But that’s what a cynic would suggest.
Updated
Better track record than Labor, says Steve Ciobo
Steve Ciobo also doesn’t think there is a problem with bullying within the federal Liberal party – or that it has a problem with women.
This comes after Alex Hawke last week said he imagined there would be a time when women outnumbered men in the federal parliament.
In fact, there seems to be no end in sight to the number of men, who obviously are sitting in the parliament solely through merit, telling us the Liberal party doesn’t have a woman problem. Despite still not preselecting women for safe seats and losing three of the women it does have, potentially leaving the federal party with five to six women in its lower house ranks after the next election.
Here is what Ciobo had to say to Sky. He became quite animated.
The fact is, yes, there have been concerns which have been ventilated, the prime minister has been involved, we have seen when they have gone on the public record, the bulk of the concerns relate to the state-based organisations, and of course that has to be dealt with and dealt with appropriately.
... The Liberal party has a terrifically strong track record, a strong track record of dealing with these sorts of matters, a strong track record of making sure the best people can come through and that is what we are going to continue to focus on.
But pressed on not having a strong track record when it came to the number of women in its party, Ciobo got mad:
This is exactly, I am sorry, you are WRONG. If you look at cabinet representation, 58% of cabinet ministers in this country, that are female, have been from the Coalition. 58%.
Reporter: But right now. We’re talking about right now. You could have five women in the lower house.
Ciobo:
I’ll tell you what we are ... we acknowledge that it ebbs and flows and we don’t pretend that. But please don’t dismiss the history, the really strong history of the Coalition with respect to female representation. Now, ours ebbs and flows ...
Reporter: You might have been good over the years, but right now, it is not looking so good.
Ciobo:
Because it ebbs and flows. This is my point – the Labor party has a quota system. It doesn’t matter who is best for the job, the Labor party says 50-50 man woman, that is the way it is going to be. Our approach is different, and what we have is a strong track record, the runs on the board, people can look at the history of the Coalition and see our success in relation to female representation, in relation to the number of females who have served in cabinet and a whole array of different measures like that.
Look at the tremendous progress that the Coalition has made with the level of female representation on government boards, the level of female representation in senior executive leadership positions. A whole array of different metrics.
The Coalition’s track record is incredibly strong – in fact, in fact – stronger than Labor’s is. And yet you and others ...
Reporter: You say it ebbs and flows, but it is at a very low ebb right now, that is the point.
Ciobo:
And this is something that we will change ... and no one is saying that it should stay the way that it is now, in fact, people are saying the opposite, they are saying we want to see those levels of representation increased again – and you know what, they will.
We have already seen, for example, in a number of our key marginal seats, where women have been preselected, we are already seeing where women are number one and number two on Senate tickets for the Coalition.
Our track record is strong – my point is, you focus on one thing and are forgetting about everything else – all the other metrics, all the history, all the background and I am simply here to remind you, that on all those other measures, our track record is stronger than Labor’s.
I absolutely concede that the level of female representation isn’t as high as we would want it to be, and we are working on that.
Updated
In a press conference this morning, Scott Morrison was asked if he was “100% confident” bullying was not a problem in the federal Liberal party.
His answer: “I am.”
Asked about Ann Sudmalis, Morrison had this to say:
Politics is a rough business, we all know that and party selections and local party politics can frankly get a bit not focused on the real issues and people can get all caught up in these little skirmishes in branches and that’s not only occurring in the Liberal party, we only have to look at the Labor party in western Sydney and you can see what’s been happening in Lindsay at the member there.
This can happen in the local branches of any organisation, it happens in the P and C. It’s important party members like parliamentary members always remember why they’re involved in politics. That’s to serve the Australian people. Not to carry on with stupid games. Now, I used to work as a party director in New South Wales. It was always ...
There is I think a bit of a camaraderie regardless of what political party you are from, whether you are a general secretary or party state director, we all get frustrated by the shenanigans and silliness that goes on within political party organisations. It irritates the stuffing out of me.
But, you know, it doesn’t distract me. It’s my job, as the prime minister and the leader of my party, to look through the dust that gets kicked up in politics, whether it’s in party organisation or frankly whether it’s in the Canberra press gallery or anywhere else, look through the dust that gets kicked up around this place and focus on the issues that matter to Australians every single day.
... I don’t think they are terribly interested in the branch politics of the Liberal party anywhere in the country. Weapon it comes to my priority, what they are interested in ranks far more higher.”
Looking through the dust, is like “strong” – it has turned up quite a bit recently, in Scott Morrison’s vernacular.
Updated
The editor of the paper Ann Sudmalis mentioned, John Hanscombe, told Fairfax:
“We’re quite used to politicians taking aim at the messenger. I understand being a politician is a tough gig, but the fact is there was a lot of disquiet that was being directed to me,” he said.
“Unfortunately as the editor of the local paper you’re going to get that information, you can’t sit on it and you are duty bound to report it.”
Updated
If you missed Ann Sudmalis’s speech, or only caught the sound bites, here it is, in all it’s glory:
I first thank the minister for health, the Hon Greg Hunt, for facilitating the continuing funding for One Door in Ulladulla. This is an essential service in my region, providing a range of mental health support services for women and families in particular. One of their mantras to their clients is: ‘Are you OK?’ Another group which is rarely asked, ‘Are you OK?’ is politicians. I would ask here that those who feel inspired to be spiteful, angry, insulting and gutless, because they’re using their keyboards, to have a think before pressing the send button. How would you feel if you received the email you’re about to send?
Politics is a place where if you do not have great resilience the actions of others can impact on your mental health. Bullying, betrayal and backstabbing have been the hallmarks of one of my state Liberal colleagues Gareth Ward over the past six-and-a-half years. In fact, I have endured the trifecta: a sour grapes defeated preselection candidate Andrew Guile, the plotting and manipulation of both people and numbers by Gareth and the reporting by the local editor of Fairfax — which I see as ‘Biasfax’ — John Hanscombe. Between them I have been misrepresented in all manner of media in a continuing barrage of actions from April 2012.
Many people will have heard rumours about my intentions for the election next year. In the first instance, let me make the following claim. Scott Morrison, apart from being the new prime minister, is someone I see as a friend. He is a man of integrity and he is absolutely passionate about the long-term progress and vision for Australia. For that reason alone, I endeavoured to hold my decision in private until after the Wentworth byelection. Unfortunately, that is now not possible.
I have asked the prime minister to acknowledge the withdrawal of my nomination for the seat of Gilmore. I want to make it abundantly clear that my decision has nothing to do with the leadership of Scott. My decision does, however, has everything to do with the NSW state division and their lack of action, and the combined undermining actions as outlined by the revenge motivated trifecta surrounding me locally. It is the state division level where I have had little or no support during the past six months while waiting for the preselection process, which should have been determined before now.
On the local scene since the day of winning preselection in 2012, the local, self-determined senior Liberal has been leaking damaging material to the media and having publicity stunts that are completely against federal policy initiatives. And more recently he approached friends asking me to nominate my retirement date and then he’d call off his people.
The final straw came when this same state MP, after stacking my branches completely, rolled my supportive FEC committee at the AGM, installing people who have never been part of a federal campaign. The FEC committee is central to winning an election. This is not the first time that Gareth has flexed his vengeance on strong Liberal women. He doesn’t just get even; he annihilates anyone who opposes him.
In 2016 Gareth worked the numbers and denied a priority position for a strong Liberal woman Kellie Marsh, a local and effective councillor. She ran independently and won a place on the Shellharbour council. That same year Gareth, while helping his friend Andrew Guile get back on to the Shoalhaven City Council, worked on the booths handing out for the independent team, knowing their preferences for the mayor would all go to the Greens candidate and not to Jo Gash, also a strong Liberal woman. Despite her winning the primary count she was defeated. Then when nominations were called for the seat of Gilmore, Gareth’s friends Paul Ell and Adam Straney strangely decided to nominate against me while Andrew Guile actively encouraged Grant Schulz to do the same.
Was I doing a lousy job? No. Only if you ask the local Labor member and even some of them think I’m doing an okay job. Was it because they thought I’d lose the last election? Hardly. When I had the confidence of the former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull and the current prime minister, Scott Morrison, openly stating on national television their support for me. This was all about Gareth’s narcissistic revenge planned and plotted.
I have decided that enough is enough. After seeing the betrayal of amazing and dedicated committee members, who are now being contacted by the new committee members asking for help, the whole scenario is pathetic. Who was this about? Certainly not the people who elected me. It was about ego driven ambition, bullying and betrayal and my local position is completely untenable.
I will work right through the term for the people who elected me. This has been and will continue to be the reason I do this job. I will continue to lobby for my dairy farmers. I still have a great deal of work to do. I will not be distracted by boys who should know better, men who know better and do nothing or women who are manipulated by false information.
I’m concerned that the media will interpret my decision as a reflection on the leadership of Scott Morrison. If they do, they will be lying. Scott truly is a good man. In the end I will always ask people, ‘Are you OK?’ and I will mean it. I’ll do everything I can to help them. Some of my friends will ask me if I am OK. Absolutely, yes. I’ve had five years working for others in the capacity of a federal member. It has been a privilege and I thank you.
Updated
Good morning
Well, that was quite the evening.
After announcing her resignation from politics at the next election, blaming branch stacking and senior state Liberals of working against her in her statement, Ann Sudmalis took to the parliament floor to name, names.
The Gilmore MP became the first Liberal woman to do so.
Politics is a place where if you do not have great resilience the actions of others can impact on your mental health. Bullying, betrayal and backstabbing have been the hallmarks of one of my state Liberal colleagues Gareth Ward over the past six-and-a-half years. In fact, I have endured the trifecta: a sour grapes defeated preselection candidate Andrew Guile, the plotting and manipulation of both people and numbers by Gareth and the reporting by the local editor of Fairfax — which I see as ‘Biasfax’ — John Hanscombe. Between them I have been misrepresented in all manner of media in a continuing barrage of actions from April 2012.
Many people will have heard rumours about my intentions for the election next year. In the first instance, let me make the following claim. Scott Morrison, apart from being the new prime minister, is someone I see as a friend. He is a man of integrity and he is absolutely passionate about the long-term progress and vision for Australia. For that reason alone, I endeavoured to hold my decision in private until after the Wentworth by-election. Unfortunately, that is now not possible.
I have asked the prime minister to acknowledge the withdrawal of my nomination for the seat of Gilmore. I want to make it abundantly clear that my decision has nothing to do with the leadership of Scott. My decision does, however, has everything to do with the NSW state division and their lack of action, and the combined undermining actions as outlined by the revenge motivated trifecta surrounding me locally. It is the state division level where I have had little or no support during the past six months while waiting for the preselection process, which should have been determined before now.
Ward denied Sudmalis’s allegations and said she should make them outside the protections of parliament, if she truly believed it:
If there was any evidence to support the claim that Ms Sudmalis made, I challenge her to make them outside of parliament where she is not protected by parliamentary privilege. As someone who was bullied because of my disability, I know what it is like to be bullied and I wouldn’t wish that or want that for anybody. So, the comments tonight I think are more reflective of someone who is bitter towards me than the other way round.”
It’s all anyone is talking about around here, so we’ll bring you more on that, along with this upcoming interview:
Tomorrow on #abc730, @leighsales interviews businesswoman Catherine Marriott, who alleges she was sexually harassed by Barnaby Joyce. Mr Joyce denies the allegations. #auspol pic.twitter.com/nNSIoLflz5
— abc730 (@abc730) September 17, 2018
Mike Bowers, who was here late last night capturing Sudmalis’s adjournment speech, having had an inkling she’d take the opportunity it offered her, has been out early this morning capturing the PM’s visit to a residential home. Gareth Hutchens is also on deck, along with Katharine Murphy. You can follow them at @mikepbowers @mpbowers, @garethrhutchens @murpharoo. You can find me @amyremeikis and sometimes, in the comments.
Ready? I am not, as I haven’t had my coffee yet, but politics waits for no caffeine hit!
So let’s get into it.
Updated
