Night time politics
The political day was dominated, as it is so often lately, by national security
- The Abbott government came under sustained attack over a letter by Sydney siege gunman Man Haron Monis. Labor’s Mark Dreyfus led the attack against attorney general George Brandis, whose office received the letter. Man Monis wanted to know if it was legal to contact the head of Islamic State, whom he referred to as Caliph Ibrahim. Foreign minister Julie Bishop said Labor’s attack was reprehensible and said Labor ministers and prime minister Gillard had received similar letters from the gunman.
- New legislation making young people up to 25 wait for unemployment benefits passed the lower house. The bill, intoduced by social services minister Scott Morrison, also cuts welfare from people facing serious violent charges but who are undergoing treatment for a mental illness.
-
The Australian Federal Police chief Andrew Colvin has answered questions and Duncan Lewis, head of Asio is now appearing in senate estimates. Lewis says he knows of 24 Australian foreign fighters killed overseas and 67 passports have been cancelled. He suggests 150-160 Australians are supportive of Isis, either exhorting or recruiting.
Parliament will sit again next week, at which point Katharine Murphy will be driving the blog bus. My thanks to Mike Bowers for his photos and Shalailah Medhora, Daniel Hurst and Lenore Taylor.
Thanks for your conversation and interaction this week.
Goodnight.
Updated
Under new national security laws, Greens senator Scott Ludlam is asking the AFP about facial recognition cameras and specifically, whether other CCTV (security/fine) cameras (as opposed to passport/airports) actively use this technology.
The department says drivers licence photos provide the biggest archive of photos of Australians, approximately 80% of people. Law enforcement agencies are able to access the archives.
Ludlam is wants to know whether the AFP is thinking of matching facial recognition technology under national security laws, with open source photo archives like Facebook.
Katherine Jones of the attorney general’s department says she will have to take it on notice.
I’m sure I am not the first one to think of that idea, says Ludlam.
WA Liberal senator Linda Reynolds asks about government’s programs on Combating Violent Extremism and specifically de-radicalising young people.
She has lost her voice and has to whisper into the microphone.
Labor senator Jacinta Collins has asked whether the AFP has done any research on the kidnapping of wealthy individuals, given the government used the threat to wind back tax disclosure laws.
Colvin says the AFP has not done any and is aware of no kidnap cases of wealthy individuals.
Thursday. Sitting day. 4.22pm. AFP commissioner Andrew Colvin is in front of senate estimates now.
The basis for Labor attack on Brandis
The Labor attack on George Brandis’ actions on the Man Monis letter revolves around the very public raising of the terror alert level on 12 September last year. Labor argues that if the government was making such a big deal of telling Australians of the need for greater caution to be exercised due to the terrorist threat, why were its ministers not acting in keeping with the public messages?
Three weeks after the threat level was raised, the Man Monis letter was received by the AG’s parliamentary office on October 9.
It said:
I would like to send a letter to Caliph Ibrahim, the leader of the Islamic State, in which making some comments and asking some questions. Please advise me whether the communication is legal or illegal.
It was signed Sheik Haron.
Labor argues that the use of “Caliph” should have rung alarm bells as this was an honorific only used by those who recognise the Islamic State and its leader.
Brandis told estimates:
What occurred with this letter is it was received in my office on the 9th of October, it was dealt with on that day by a DLO [Department Liaison Officer] in the routine fashion, who indicated that it should be replied to by the department, by the National Security Law and Policy Branch. That it was sent to the department and received by the department on the same day, the 9th of October 2014. Then a reply was prepared and sent over the signature of the Acting Assistant Secretary of the National Security Law and Policy division, dated the 5th of November 2014.
The response was written to “Mr/s Haron” regarding “Caliph Ibrahim”. It advised that it was an offence to associate with listed terrorist groups such as Islamic State but the department could not give legal advice.
It comes across as a very junior, routine letter.
The attack on the Lindt Cafe occurred on 15 December, 2014.
My question is to the minister representing the attorney general.
Nick Champion is booted from the chamber.
Updated
Fantastic series from Mike Bowers on the government whip Andrew Nikolic interjecting and being sent from the chamber.
Andrew Nikolic gets punted under 94a Tally-coalition 6 opposition 363 #44thParl @GuardianAus @gabriellechan pic.twitter.com/AobAUhBZ9x
— Mike Bowers (@mpbowers) May 28, 2015
Dreyfus to Bishop: Is it the government’s position that if another known criminal was known to be seeking to make contact with the head of a terrorist organisation the government would treat this inexactly the same way?
Leader of the House, Christopher Pyne intervenes to say the question is hypothetical. Tony Burke says it goes to the specifics. Speaker Bishop rules the question out of order - the ninth on the Man Monis letter.
Anthony Albanese takes another point, saying the question goes to something which has occurred. (As opposed to a hypothetical.)
Speaker Bishop does not budge.
Dreyfus to Bishop: In the light of the answers given today, is it the Government’s position that the nation’s chief law officer was contacted by a known felon who gave notice to the Attorney-General that he would like to contact the leader of a terrorist organisation and the attorney-general was right to do nothing, absolutely nothing, about it?
Julie Bishop says the Man Monis letter was dealt with by the siege review and there was no criticism.
I question what point the member is trying to make. Does he really believe this is assisting the families of those killed in that attack?
Dreyfus to Bishop: I refer to the letter the attorney-general received from Man Monis on 9 October, 2 months before the Sydney siege. Does the Minister agree with the Attorney-General that a letter received from a convicted felon known to security agencies and on bail for violent criminal offences requesting advice about contacting the head of what the prime minister describes as “the death cult” within a month of the threat level being raise to its highest level in Australia’s history can be classified as routine correspondence?
Bishop:
I note the member for Isaacs is concerned with the use of a particular title in this letter. Well, it’s quite evident that titles can be quite misleading. The member for Isaacs is referred to as “the honourable”. Madam Speaker, I am advised that all proper protocols and appropriate practices were adhered to in this matter.
Dreyfus questions protocols on Man Monis letter
Dreyfus to Bishop: I refer to the statement from the attorney-general just now quoted by foreign minister in her previous answer. Why did the attorney-general wait until today to speak to the director-general of ASIO about this matter?
Government whip Andrew Nikolic starts yelling:
Why didn’t you stop him writing letters? !
Speaker Bishop asks the former serviceman to desist but he continues, appearing enraged.
The member for Bass will remove himself under 94A. I call the honourable the member for foreign affairs representing the Attorney-General.
Julie Bishop is, herself, extremely cranky that Dreyfus will not back off his line of enquiry. She says Brandis’ chief of staff was a former director general of Asio who was confident of the protocols. She reminds Dreyfus that former NSW Labor leader John Robertson wrote a reference for Monis, as his constituent. She also reminds him that Labor have had many briefings on the issue and:
cannot claim to be ignorant of the significant threat that terrorism is posing to this country.
Dreyfus to Bishop: I refer to the letter the attorney-general received from Man Monis on 9 October, 9 weeks before the Sydney siege. The AG said yesterday that the letter did not contain, and “Any statements of support or affiliation for Islamic State”. How can this statement by the AG be justified given Monis requested information about contacting the person he referred to as, and I quote, Kalif, Ibrahim, the leader of the Islamic State.
Bishop says she is advised that all proper protocols were adopted and proper practices were followed in this case.
Updated
Not happy Mark.
A government question to Peter Dutton on the proposed citizenship laws.
A government question to Bishop: Will the Minister update the House on the threat posed by foreign fighters internationally? What steps has the government taken to partner with other countries to counter this threat?
Then Dreyfus to Bishop: I refer to the letter the attorney-general received from Man Monis on 9 October, 9 weeks before the Sydney siege. Why didn’t the use by Man Monis of the honorific title - and I quote -Khalif Ibrahim - unquote - to describe the leader of Daesh automatically raise flags in the attorney-general’s private office or his department?
Julie Bishop:
The director-general ofASIO has said that in his view since the letter was a request for legal advice it was appropriate that the matter was referred to theAttorney-General’s department for response. The letter andthe Attorney-General department’s reply were both placed before the inquiry into the Martin Place siege conducted by the secretaries of the prime minister’s and the NSW Premier’s departments. That report did not have any criticism at all in the way in which the Monis letter was dealt and I find it extraordinary that this former attorney-general is seeking to make some political mileage out of this national tragedy.
A government question to Scott Morrison, then Dreyfus is up again.
Dreyfus to Bishop: I refer to the minister’s previous answer. Has the protocol for correspondence that contains references to contact with Daesh, Islamic State, ISIS, ISIL, IS or similar terms in the attorney-general’s private office and in his department been revised? If so, when was it revised?
Julie Bishop repeats her outrage.
Mark Dreyfus is not backing off on the Man Haron Monis letters.
Question to Julie Bishop: On 12 September last year, Australia’s terror alert level was raised to its highest level in our history. Is it correct that no protocols were changed in ministerial offices including the attorney-general’s office as a result of the terror alert level being raised?
This government put in a range of measures as a result of the change in the security threat level, including over $600m in extra funding and indeed, as I recall, the Labor opposition were briefed on more than one occasion about the changes that were made to security arrangements in departments and in this place.
Bishop says Dreyfus:
- ignored the independent national security legislation monitors first substantive annual report 2012.
- shelved the Council of Australian Governments review of counter-terrorism 2013.
- did nothing about the parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security’s (PJCIS) inquiry into potential reforms of the national security legislation 2013.
Like his Labor predecessors, he ignored urgent requests from our agencies for a data retention law and then did his best to frustrate our attempts to pass such legislation.
Two government questions, small business and drought.
Man Haron Monis sent letters to former Labor ministers and former PM Gillard
Mark Dreyfus to Julie Bishop representing the AG: On 12 September last year, Australia’s terror alert level was raised to its highest level in our history. What protocols were changed in ministerial office, including the attorney-general’ office, as a result of the terror alert level being raised?
This is going to the Man Haron Monis letter and the information coming out of senate estimates in the first post.
Julie Bishop gives Dreyfus a serve for seeking “to make political mileage out of a national tragedy”.
We have seen the line of questioning in senate estimates today about protocols in theAttorney-General’s department and what the attorney-general under the Labor Government, the now member for Isaacs (Dreyfus), has failed to point out is that letters were received from this gentleman by the former attorney-general himself. By former Labor ministers. By the former prime minister Gillard, by the former attorney-general McClelland and for this former attorney-general to seek to question protocols in the attorney-general’s department that he well knows were in place when he was there and he received a letter from Mr Monis is beneath contempt.
Bob Katter asks Barnaby Joyce about reductions in Australia’s cattle handling costs, which were part of the discussion when reopening the live cattle trade.
Jenny Macklin to Tony Abbott: Theresa Sutton is a grandparent carer in the electorate of Swan who is raising her 12 and 14-year-old grandchildren. Theresa will lose around $100 a fortnight because of this government’s cuts to Family Tax Benefit part B. Why does the prime minister think that it’s fair to cut $100 a fortnight from grandparent carers like Theresa?
Abbott reminds Macklin of the cuts to single mother’s benefits.
In 2013, when the member for Jagajaga was the minister, she forced 84,000 single mums on to Newstart as part of a budget cut to save $738m over four years. Madam Speaker, these were savings that Labor made in government that were largely supported by this opposition because this coalition in opposition believed that when the government was doing the right and responsible thing - it didn’t often happen when members opposite were in government - but when government did the right and responsible thing, oppositions should support it.
Updated
A government question to Hockey: Will the Treasurer outline to the house how the budget helps build a stronger Australia and a stronger economy?
Chris Bowen to Joe Hockey: I refer to today’s poor private capital expenditure results, down 11% since the federal election and the worst quarterly result since the global financial crisis. Is this more evidence of the instantaneous adrenalin charge to the economy that the prime minister promised before the election or the real momentum the treasurer keeps reminding us of?
Hockey:
And of course when it comes to capital expenditure and given that this is in fact capital expenditure by the private sector as reported by the ABS,by the private sector, and given that there has been a substantial reduction in commodity investment and construction associated with a fall in iron ore prices in particular, the fall in Capex was not without expectation.
Hockey says the biggest two issues for the fall:
- the defeat of Newman government in Queensland and decision by the Queensland government to stop the asset recycling program
- and Victorian Labor’s decision to “rip up” the East West Link contract.
Operation Cloudburst.
The government question is on small business measures in the budget.
First question from Shorten to Abbott, asking the PM to support the policy to allow every child in every primary school to learn to code.
Abbott says:
It’s now on the curriculum at every level.
Fancy seeing you here.
Three of the press gallery’s experienced journalists were surprised to find themselves in hot water for making an informal approach to the prime minister, Tony Abbott, after question time on Wednesday.
The West Australian’s federal political editor, Andrew Probyn, Fairfax Media’s chief political correspondent, Mark Kenny, and the Australian Financial Review’s chief political correspondent, Phillip Coorey, were seeking guidance on his comments about same-sex marriage being an issue the parliament should own.
It is understood that no cameras or notepads were used during the informal approach and the prime minister politely declined to expand on his comments as he walked back to his office.
But Kenny subsequently received a phone call from the office of the Serjeant-at-arms telling him and the other two journalists to attend a meeting at 1pm today with the Serjeant regarding a complaint that had been lodged about an alleged breach of the rules for media activity in Parliament House.
The journalists did not believe there had been any breach given it was not a formal “doorstop” or interview, and such conversations are a common occurrence in Parliament House.
Coorey received an assurance from the prime minister’s office that it had not lodged a complaint and that Abbott did not have an issue with the approach. It is understood the PMO then spoke to the Serjeant’s office, which cancelled the planned meeting with the journalists.
Kenny confirmed the sequence of events and said:
It’s another example of security procedure and rules being enforced in parliament house these days and mitigating against journalists doing their job. I can’t believe and don’t believe that the prime minister had any involvement in it because he’s always been someone who is happy to talk to journalists.
Probyn said:
It [the approach] was no big deal. It was done in a good-humoured way. The prime minister I believe also treated it in a good-humoured way. These sorts of conversations happen daily between journalists and politicians. I would be horrified if any move was made to limit our casual conversations with the nation’s politicians.
We’re three of the senior correspondents in the press gallery. We have got a combined 50 years of experience in this building and these sorts of conversations have been held between journalists and prime ministers for decades.
Updated
Advance Australia Fair.
More on the illegal workers in a moment, as Shalailah Medhora has the whole report.
In the meantime, today there has been:
- a range of legislation before the house, including social security measures which implement a four week wait for the dole and welfare restrictions mentally ill patients facing serious charges.
- President of the Human Rights Commission, Gillian Triggs, has appeared before the sentate estimates.
- Justice minister Michael Keenan has been sworn in as minister assisting the prime minister on counter-terrorism.
Question time coming up in 10 minutes.
Illegal workers found
Immigration Peter Dutton and Michaela Cash have announced 38 illegal workers were found after nine businesses in the agriculture sector were raided in Operation Cloud Burst.
Three of the businesses were featured in the recent Four Corners program.
Of the workers, 32 were unlawful non-citizens, and 6 were working in breach of their visa conditions.
Two labour hire contractors have been detained.
A trio of Greens is speaking on the need for marriage equality:
It can be done and it will be done, but it needs to be across parties and across the Parliament, says Sarah Hanson-Young.
It is about achieving marriage equality, that is long overdue in Australia and it would be wonderful to have it done and to see weddings happening in this country in spring.
A snippet from Adam Bandt and Janet Rice in a mo. Peter Dutton up now.
Peek-a-boo!
NB crossbenches: The people want the one month wait on dole
One last post on Scott Morrison. He was asked about the potential of more changes in the senate, given some crossbenchers were still worried about cutting out benefits for a month.
I know that crossbenchers will be considering carefully the broader views of the Australian people when it comes to this issue, and we feel very strongly about these measures.
We reversed a $1.8bn saving on this matter and we decided that we believed it is an important policy to have in place that you shouldn’t have to wait if you’re job ready. You can easily now - based on the advice I’ve given you today - dismiss all the scare campaigns which says people with disabilities or people with children, or people who are pregnant will somehow be affected by this policy.
This document is not an Ikea catalogue to go shopping for benefits.
The four week waiting period for unemployment benefits - cut from six months - requires conditions to qualify at the end.
- We’re asking them to meet with a job-active provider, agree a job plan
- we are asking them to develop an up-to-date resume
- We are asking them to create a jobseeker profile on the job search website and asking them to apply for jobs.
See, we’re asking young people to take the job that’s there, that’s what we’re asking. If you want to take a welfare benefit, then you have to apply for jobs, you have to have a go about getting a job.
Scott Morrison is holding up a Centrelink brochure of government benefits.
One of the more concerning things I’ve had in this new responsibility as minister for social services is to be briefed on what happens at the end of each school year, particularly for young school leavers and this document is not an Ikea catalogue to go shopping for benefits.
(His lilac shirt is wilting. Hard man back in charge.)
We heard you on last year’s budget, says Morrison.
We listened to what people had to say about the measure we put in place last year. We listened hard, and what they said was six months was too long. What they said to us was 30 was too high. What they said to us isyou needed to invest more in helping young people get into work. That’s what this bill does.
Scott Morrison is speaking to media on the social services bill.
What we have done in this new bill is to withdraw the measure that was in last year’s budget which related to a 6-month waiting period for those under the age of 30 in relation to access to the dole allowances. What we have done in its place is introduce a new measure which would see people aged under the age of 25 have to wait 4 weeks in addition to the normal 1-week waiting period time before they could access what will be the youth allowance. And that is up to the age of 25.
Exemptions to this rule via Morrison:
- former carers of people with a disability,
- those recently released from prison or psychiatric facilities,
- young people who are unable to live at home,
- young people with undiagnosed mental illness, and
- humanitarian and other migrant youth.
- if someone has a disability or are pregnant, in the last six weeks of their pregnancy, they will not have to serve out the waiting period.
- parents who have the primary care responsibility for their children are not included in these measures.
A little coalition tete-a-tete on same sex marriage.
@GChristensenMP Jesus always did what was right, did not stick to the day's convention. He brought clarity & said so #auspol
— Ewen Jones MP (@EwenJonesMP) May 28, 2015
The Australian Information Commissioner, Professor John McMillan, is in front of senate estimates.
Scott Morrison has a press conference shortly.
Peter Dutton is up after Morrison. (Or as Mike Bowers would say, ScoMo followed by PDut.)
Then question time.
The bills are flowing through the house right now.
Fresh from his swearing in, justice minister Michael Keenan is speaking to the Law Enforcement Legislation Amendment (Powers) Bill 2015.
He says the new laws “confirm” the current powers of the Australian Crime Commission and the Integrity Commissioner rather than “expand” them.
From the explanatory memo:
These powers allow:
ACC examiners to compel a person to answer questions about matters, or produce documents or things, relating to an ACC special operation or special investigation into serious and organised criminal activity, and
the Integrity Commissioner to compel a person to answer questions about matters, or produce documents or things, relating to an investigation into law enforcement corruption.
A person cannot refuse to answer a question, or produce a document or thing, in an examination or a hearing on the basis that it might incriminate them, or expose them to a penalty. However, there are limitations on the circumstances in which answers can be used in evidence against the person in criminal proceedings or proceedings for the imposition of a penalty.
Sounds like Labor is supporting but Daniel Hurst is checking now. It has not been voted on yet and further debate has finished.
Updated
Regarding the last post, thanks to the parliamentary library for sending the backgrounder on the bill, which offers this interesting history of the act and why the government is changing it. The definition of rehabilitation for the mentally ill appears to be the sticking point for the government.
Before 2002, the Department of Social Security (and then Centrelink) interpreted ‘course of rehabilitation’ narrowly when they administered the Act. However in a 2002 case, the Federal Court upheld a broader interpretation of ‘course of rehabilitation’ and Centrelink responded by incorporating the broader interpretation into its guidelines.
As a result of the change in the interpretation of ‘course of rehabilitation’ a larger number of forensic patients are now able to receive income support payments. The government argues that the current situation does not reflect the original policy intent. The Social Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2015 (the Bill) amends the Act so that people who are undergoing psychiatric confinement because they have been charged with a serious offence cannot receive social security payments except during a period when they are being integrated back into the community. The current arrangements will continue to apply for those undergoing psychiatric confinement because they have been charged with a non-serious offense. It is not clear why the Government has adopted this approach rather than attempting to legislate a narrower definition for ‘course of rehabilitation.’ Neither the Explanatory Memorandum nor the Minister’s second reading speech give a rationale for the distinction between serious and non-serious offences.
Mental health welfare cuts pass house
Another piece of social services legislation has passed the house which plans to cut welfare payments from certain mental health patients.
This is the bill that Scott Morrison says will save $29.5m across four years by cutting welfare payments to anyone charged with a serious criminal offence but confined to a psychiatric institution. It is expected to affect around 350 people.
A senate committee is examining the legislation still but by passing the house, the bill will now sit awaiting the senate’s judgement. Head of the National Mental Health Commission, Allan Fels is one of a number of mental health groups and state ministers who are worried about the bill.
This sends a negative symbolic message, reinforcing stigmatised beliefs that people with mental illness or intellectual disability need to be confined first and rehabilitated second, Fels says.
Now you see him.
Now you don’t.
Exit stage left.
Lenore Taylor revealed that former environment minister Greg Combet is helping Labor develop an emissions trading scheme policy. Shorten is asked about “going down this [ETS] road again”.
In terms of the specific proposition you say because someone involved in the previous Labor Government is helping us now that therefore you assume there is a carbon tax on the way, that’s just wrong. That is just wrong. We will not have a carbon tax but we will be the only fair dinkum major political party in Australia on climate change.
The distinction here being the one that caused so much political difficulty for Julia Gillard - the difference between a carbon tax and an emissions trading scheme.
The government keep using Labor’s commitment to an ETS as a weapon, though they might find the rest of the world has moved on. Lenore has also written about the capacity for an ETS in Direct Action.
Shorten is asked whether he will talk to the states about the GST on sanitary pads.
When Tony Abbott just simply handballs the issues to the states, most of the states have said yes, they would support this already. I think the two holdouts are a neutral answer from NSW and nothing heard from the Western Australian government. I know that Labor premiers are most interested in trying to fix up this unfair treatment of women in society.
Bill Shorten is having a press conference on cuts to health, including the $125m cut from childrens’ dental programs.
If you go to page 100 of the Budget paper No.2 they are changing the indexation formula. The government loves getting lost in the weeds of this detail because they take people’s attention off the real issue. The real issue here is there will be $125m less available for families to claim in order to help support the cost of getting their children, young children, to be able to get the sort of dental care which they need for the future.
The tampon debate continues.
There are enormous tampons outside Parlt pic.twitter.com/xG5i9Db0Kj
— Lenore Taylor (@lenoretaylor) May 27, 2015
Over in the lower house, a slew of bills have been introduced, including the new social services amendment by Scott Morrison, which revises the killer six month waiting times for unemployment benefits from last years budget to the four weeks in this year’s budget.
Here is the relevant bit from the bill:
- Income support waiting periods – introduce a revised four-week waiting period for youth income support from 1 July 2016 – that is, introduce a replacement for the measure provided by Schedule 7 to the No. 4 Bill, which required young people with full capacity to serve a six-month waiting period for income support, with access to payment for six months and rolling six‑month non‑payment periods thereafter.
Human rights “freedom” commissioner Tim Wilson is in front of estimates now. Labor wants to know, given he has been travelling around the country on freedom, Indigenous issues and consulting on LGBTI issues, does he have a “roving brief”.
Yes, pretty much, was the essence of his answer.
Wilson and ATSI social justice commissioner Mick Gooda have been consulting with Indigenous communities about the restrictions of the use of their land title in relation to their property rights.
Wilson expected 15-20 people and 60 leaders turned up. This is about the rules governing the use of native title, which can be quite restrictive for communities when it comes to using the asset in business development and finance.
Gooda is giving evidence now, teasing out the issues.
Updated
Labor senator Jacinta Collins wants to know if the process for the next appointment of the sex discrimination commissioner has begun. Minister Simon Birmingham, for Brandis, is not giving any info about the process.
The current commissioner Elizabeth Broderick is retiring in September and questions have been raised over when the replacement process will begin. Disability commissioner Graeme Innes, you might remember, was not replaced.
The president of the Human Rights Commission, Gillian Triggs, is before the Senate estimates with minister George Brandis.
Triggs is talking about the last estimates, when senators wanted specific information about three cases investigated by the Commission, including that of John Basikbasik.
Triggs believes she should not disclose certain information on the grounds of public interest immunity and believes if she were compelled to do so, it could lead to other statutory bodies having to disclose certain information.
Brandis said it’s a matter for the committee, in this case the senate legal and constitutional affairs legislation committee. But he goes on to say:
If you look at the relevant provisions of the Human Rights Commission act, in particular section 49, there is no self-sufficient power vested in the president to make a public interest immunity claim.
With that, Brandis has to leave the committee.
Labor senators suggest that they have different advice. Triggs tells the chair the HRC did consult AG’s department and they were advised the way the submission was presented was appropriate.
It all gets too hard and committee chair Ian Macdonald defers that particular debate until more advice is sought.
Updated
Now to gay marriage.
There are a couple of interpretations around this morning about whether Tony Abbott’s language in parliament yesterday represents a shift. Or not.
Here is what he said:
I can’t foresee the future. I don’t know how our society will develop. I don’t know how this parliament will proceed in the months and years ahead. I do just make this one point, though, Madam Speaker. If our parliament were to make a big decision on a matter such as this, it ought to be owned by the parliament and not by any particular party.
Here is Michelle Grattan in The Conversation:
Tony Abbott’s opposition to marriage equality won’t change, but one gets the impression he’s realising this tide can’t be held back for much longer.
Abbott might be thinking about how to avoid personally looking too bad in defeat – and also the way to prevent Shorten or the Greens taking all the kudos on a popular issue if a vote is carried before the election.
As usual, David Rowe in the Fin is worth a look.
RSVP ...bill ant tony's nuptials @FinancialReview #MarriageEquaility #auspol @PoliticsFairfax pic.twitter.com/bdm9JpM3mP
— david rowe (@roweafr) May 27, 2015
More breaking news. Barnaby Joyce was asked about it this morning.
I believe in traditional marriage and that never gets you friends.
But the last word to Mark Di Stefano of Buzzfeed.
The most perfect sign Australia's marriage equality "debate" is now done and won pic.twitter.com/KFxmmFYtPf
— Mark Di Stefano (@MarkDiStef) May 27, 2015
A couple of other things coming up for your viewing pleasure.
Mike Bowers will be heading out to see the swearing in at Government House of the new special somethings, Philip Ruddock and Concetta Fierravanti-Wells.
I mean no disrespect. They are leading the national conversation on citizenship and “community harmony”. Tony Abbott referred to Ruddock as a special envoy. Others call them ministers. I’m slightly confused.
Abbott said:
Phillip Ruddock as my special envoy for citizenship and community engagement.
and:
parliamentary secretary Connie Fierravanti-Wells, in addition to her current role as parliamentary secretary for social services, Connie will also become parliamentary secretary to the attorney-general.
Updated
Instant asset write on.
Agriculture minister Barnaby Joyce is pretty happy. He has had a win in cabinet.
The issue was over the tax write-offs for business spending to prepare for drought at a time when 80% of Queensland in drought-declared.
Before I go into the detail, I declare my own interest. My family owns a farm.
On budget night, instant asset write-offs were available to small businesses with a turn-over less than $2m. The farm write-offs, for things like fencing, water infrastructure and fodder storage, were not available until the following year – 2016-17. Which was kinda weird because the drought is happening now.
The whole budget treatment of taxable items caused immense confusion because I’d hazard a guess that a lot of farms are under the $2m turnover. So could they “have a go” and buy a silo or not? Accountants were sending out information, saying hold off. The day after the budget, Joyce was asked about it. I’m trying to fix it, said Barnaby.
Yesterday, the policy was released. Joyce’s explanation then and this morning on radio, was that the measures were part of the agriculture white paper, which I’m told is sitting on the minister’s desk. Joyce is under pressure to unveil the thing, which is long overdue. It would appear the hold up is the prime minister’s office, which has the ultimate say.
Joyce wasn’t going into that but he was unapologetic about the budget rethink.
I don’t think it’s a crime if you make something work better.
He released a few new figures on drought. When the government came to office (in the first year of drought) 367 people were on interim farm family payment – the equivalent of a Newstart payment. Now there are 4,300 receiving it.
Michael Brissenden on AM asked Joyce, given the PM’s comments about the “lifestyle choices” of isolated Indigenous communities, aren’t rural communities in the same boat?
The weather is not a lifestyle choice.
Updated
Good morning,
Welcome to the final sitting day of the week. The news this morning is dominated by two different ball games, notably Fifa and the State of Origin. In politics though, the senate estimates continue to yield interesting tidbits that would have otherwise remained unearthed.
It turns out the Sydney siege gunman Man Haron Monis sent a letter to attorney general George Brandis to ask whether he was allowed to write to the head of the Islamic State. The letter, signed Sheik Haron, said:
I would like to send a letter to Caliph Ibrahim, the leader of the Islamic State, in which making some comments and asking some questions. Please advise me whether the communication is legal or illegal.
It came to Brandis in his parliamentary office and the AG told the estimates hearing that he passed it on to the department as it was considered routine. Here’s Brandis:
I’m bound to say the tone of the letter is not obviously threatening, nor does the letter apparently contain any endorsement or indication of favourability towards Islamic State. It merely, in a neutral tone, asks a question about whether to communicate with this individual by making comments and asking questions is (it) legal or illegal.
Labor’s Mark Dreyfus described the letter as “anything but routine”.
When the prime minister very publicly, at press conferences, pleaded with Australians to refer to agencies anything out of the ordinary, this was something that should have been referred.
The other interesting story around today comes via Nikki Savva in The Australian around the senate voting changes. These are the reforms that the major parties and the Greens have been talking about since the last senate result, which has seen a crew of minor parties and independents take their seats on the crossbenches. The majors considered the result, that saw senators like Ricky Muir get in on 1,700 votes, a travesty of democracy. Fancy having ordinary people in parliament.
A subsequent report recommended the elimination of group ticket voting and the introduction of optional preferential voting above the line, lessening the ability of minor players to game preferences.
But having supported the recommendations originally, Savva reports Labor senators are cooling on the idea. Senate leader Penny Wong and her deputy Stephen Conroy are against the changes, Savva reports. NSW senator Sam Dastyari, who comes from a state with optional preferential voting above the line, is agin it. He told Savva:
Frankly I can’t find a single Labor senator that supports any of this. It would be complete madness for Labor to support any proposal that would risk forever preventing a progressive Senate. I can’t see Labor doing that. If the Greens want to sign their own suicide note and do a deal with the Liberals, good luck to them. Let’s see them explain to their supporters why they are prepared to give up control of the Senate for their own jobs.
But in the lower house, Labor MP Alan Griffin has supported the changes, as has George Wright, the party’s national secretary.
After the Abbott government’s last budget, the second this senate reform package is introduced into the parliament, a little flag goes up for the election.
So stick around. I’ll get to marriage equality in a minute. Follow the @mpbowers and me @gabriellechan.
Updated
