What we learnt today, Monday 7 August
Thanks for joining us for a busy day here on the liveblog. That’s where we’ll leave our rolling coverage.
Here were today’s main developments:
Excitement is building ahead of tonight’s big game, where the Matildas will face Denmark in the round-of-16 at the Women’s World Cup. We will bring you the game live from 6.30pm AEST, and you can follow our coverage of England v Nigeria now.
The prime minister, Anthony Albanese, said a public holiday will be on the agenda at national cabinet if Australia makes it to the final.
The Sofronoff inquiry made “several serious findings of misconduct” against outgoing ACT director of public prosecutions, Shane Drumgold SC. It was released by the ACT government today following extensive leads. You can read the full story here, and view the report here.
NT Labor senator Malarndirri McCarthy said she is “not at all” worried about the yes campaign for an Indigenous voice to parliament failing, and is “optimistic” the voice would be operating in this term of government if the referendum succeeds.
The former Nationals MP Andrew Gee, who quit the party over its referendum stance, said “history will judge [the Liberals] very poorly” for their opposition to the voice, saying it will alienate a “huge cross-section of people”.
Meanwhile, the opposition leader Peter Dutton’s office had to clarify that Jacinta Nampijinpa Price misspoke when she incorrectly said he had been to the Garma festival “several times already” on the radio this morning.
Debate on the voice continued throughout the afternoon during question time, where the deputy leader of the opposition, Sussan Ley, was ejected after accusing deputy prime minister Richard Males of “mansplaining”.
Albanese said he is likely to meet with China’s president Xi Jinping at the G20 summit in India next month.
Today marks the beginning of homelessness week. Market analytics showed a significant drop in rental vacancy rates across the country this month, with decreases recorded in every capital city.
Meanwhile, Homelessness NSW’s acting chief executive, Amy Hains, said more people than ever were facing homelessness in the state in part because of a “long-term failure to invest in adequate social and affordable housing”.
A NSW government plan to allow aerial shooting of feral horses in Kosciuszko national park in an effort to protect endangered species has been welcomed by environmental groups.
Updated
As excitement builds for tonight’s World Cup match, Labor MP Andrew Leigh has shared a photo of Parliament House lit up in green and gold to support of the Matildas:
Parliament House is lit up tonight for the #Matildas!#auspol #TilItsDone pic.twitter.com/3lzyp4qI3Z
— Andrew Leigh (@ALeighMP) August 7, 2023
The Opera House will also be shining brightly tonight:
The Sydney Opera House will be lit from 6pm AEST tonight to support @TheMatildas as they take on Denmark #FIFAWWC ⚽ 🇦🇺 Aussie aussie aussie!
— Sydney Opera House (@SydOperaHouse) August 7, 2023
📷 NSW Government pic.twitter.com/oiwkcwFmdF
Updated
In case you missed it during question time earlier on, prime minister Anthony Albanese took aim at the opposition frontbench for not attending Garma festival at the weekend, ahead of the Indigenous voice to parliament referendum.
You can watch the video below:
Mark Butler dismisses pharmacy guild claims on increased medicine prices as ‘scare campaign’
Health minister Mark Butler has called claims aged care residents will pay up to $800 more a year for weekly medicine “complete rubbish”.
The figures, which come from a financial analysis commissioned by the Pharmacy Guild, claim costs to package and deliver medicines aged care facilities will add $806 a year to each elderly resident’s bill.
The guild is rallying against the federal government’s changes to dispensary periods, which will allow patients to receive 60 days’ worth of medicine from 1 September.
The guild says pharmacy owners will lose revenue due to a halving in dispensing fees and will therefore no longer be able to package and deliver medicines to aged facilities for free.
Butler refuted the lobby group’s claims on Monday afternoon, saying it was a scare campaign and was intentionally targeting a “hot button issue” within the aged care community.
It’s a scare campaign, and it’s rubbish. These arrangements are covered by existing funding, which has nothing to do with the 60-day dispensing, nothing to do with direct funding arrangements to pharmacy.
The minister says it hopes the guild will sit down with the government soon to offer “confidence and certainty” to the sector over the next five years.
Updated
It’s been a big day of news, so take a moment to catch up on all the major headlines with the Afternoon Briefing from Mostafa Rachwani:
One in three Australians experiencing loneliness, according to new report
Almost one in three Australians feel lonely, with young and middle-aged people facing the highest levels of loneliness, according to a new report.
The report is Australia’s first state of the nation report on social connection, coinciding with Australia’s inaugural loneliness awareness week.
It shows that loneliness is affecting men and women equally in Australia, but those in rural areas are more lonely. Meanwhile, 1 in 6 Australians say they are experiencing severe loneliness.
Labor MP Andrew Leigh - who is part of the parliamentary friends for ending loneliness - said the issue of loneliness sits within a broader discussion on whether Australia is a “nation of me” or a “country of we”.
Leigh noted a decline in sporting participation in recent years, as well as fewer people who volunteer, attend a religious service, are members of a trade union or get involved in community groups on a regular basis.
He also said a factor in the “we versus me” challenge is inequality:
Over the course of the last generation, we’ve seen a rise in the gap between the haves and the have-nots, a doubling at the top 1% share, and a tripling of the top 0.1% share. The number of billionaires have gone through the roof.
Yet we’ve got a significant challenge in Australia around issues of homelessness and poverty. As Australians have lost friends, so too the gap between social classes has increased.
Leigh said turning this around isn’t just a matter for government but for everyone, encouraging people to host “street drinks” to meet their neighbours and make an effort to meet one new person at social events.
So much of the Australian story lies in things we’ve achieved together.
Joined Parliamentary Friends for Ending Loneliness (which should be renamed "Parliamentary Enemies of Loneliness") to launch the new research report from Ending Loneliness Together.
— Andrew Leigh (@ALeighMP) August 7, 2023
Launch speech: https://t.co/Cyqnnnvym2
Report: https://t.co/IK4WLKDPqa #auspol #reconnected pic.twitter.com/vMNEm6Bncc
Updated
Public and media scrutiny made it ‘more difficult’ to prosecute Lehrmann case, ACT attorney general says
Rattenbury said public and media scrutiny made it “more difficult to prosecute this matter”:
It put pressure on all the players in the system, there was demands to get information sooner than they may have done through a normal course of investigation, so that is an issue.
He is asked if he sees a freedom of the press issue, because the community may not have otherwise known about the “friction” between police and the DPP:
This is a difficult balance and the end of this we should not lose sight of the fact that there were two people who are involved in a very difficult case that, to me they are the most central players in this.
Updated
Rattenbury: ACT Department of Public Prosecutions ‘in about as good a shape as you might expect’
Rattenbury is asked if there is residual damage from all of this within the office of the DPP.
He said the acting director of public prosecutions has indicated people are finding this a difficult period, but are getting on with their work:
They play an incredibly important role in our justice system and my advice is the staff morale and the office is in as good a shape as you might expect.
He also comments on why he believes this is a “case like no other”, responding to questions of whether this case raises broader systemic questions of the DPP or broader justice system:
The context in which I was making the observation was between the level of political commentary, media scrutiny [and] the extraordinary coverage of this case.
Sexual assault cases are some of the most difficult to take through the criminal justice system. To have that underlying level of difficulty and on top of it all those other levels of involvement of leaking going on, of the sharing of information, I think that has what has made this a particularly exceptional case.
Updated
No plans to review cases in which Shane Drumgold was involved
Shane Rattenbury is asked about the backlog of cases with which Shane Drumgold was personally involved, and whether these leave questions to be answered:
In response to media inquiries about this, we have looked back. Mr Drumgold was appointed in 2019, since that time he has personally had the lead on 18 matters. Most of those were appellant matters, matters on appeal, that means the issues of disclosure, evidence gathering, had all been dealt with by the time he took over the matter in an appeal scenario. At this point, we have no evidence to suggest there is a need to review any those cases.
Q: But if a lawyer came forward for someone?
Rattenbury:
Clearly, if somebody comes forward with a specific concern we would need to look at that, and there are also existing judicial processes … those parties have the opportunity to raise any concerns in the court as part of the process.
Updated
Lehrmann trial ‘has raised a lot of questions’, ACT attorney general says
ACT attorney general Shane Rattenbury just spoke to the ABC following the release of the Sofronoff report earlier this afternoon.
Rattenbury was asked if he would have moved to have Shane Drumgold sacked if he had not quit:
Clearly the findings in the report meant that Mr Drumgold’s position was untenable. I conveyed that to him last week …
It was clearly understood that given the commentary in the report and the mistakes that were made by Mr Drumgold, his position could not continue.
He was also asked if he had any misgivings about Drumgold’s investment in cases, but particularly the Higgins-Lehrmann case, prior to November last year:
Clearly, the particular Lehrmann trial has raised a lot of questions and there has been a lot of conjecture around the case from a whole range of perspectives.
As attorney I tried not to listen to the noise there [so] that is why we established this inquiry to make sure that amongst all of the commentary and the critiques and the various perspectives, we could try and have a considered look at this inquiry and the allegations that had been made around it.
Updated
Human remains located amid search for missing Maryam Hamka
Detectives have located what appears to be human remains as part of an investigation into the suspicious disappearance of Maryam Hamka.
In a statement, Victorian police said investigators re-commenced a search in the Cape Schanck area this morning and the remains, which are yet to be formally identified, were found around 10:30am in bushland off Rogers Road.
The coroner has been advised and a post mortem will be conducted.
Hamka was first reported missing by her family on 15 April, 2021. She was last seen leaving a Woolworths store in Brunswick on 10 April the same year.
In August 2021 a 41-year-old Brighton man was charged with one count of murder and remanded in custody, and the following month a 26-year-old Richmond man was charged with assist offender (murder) and drug offences.
Assistant commissioner Mick Frewen said investigative efforts by the missing person’s squad, crime command and police have been “tireless and extraordinary” in hopes of providing answers to Hamka’s family:
Our heartfelt thoughts are with Maryam’s family and friends. The past two years have been an incredibly difficult time for them and their grief remains as raw as ever.
... We hope that this will bring the closure they need and Maryam can finally be laid to rest.
Updated
Public holiday on agenda for national cabinet if Matildas make it to final
Prime minister Anthony Albanese says he will make an appeal to the states and territories at national cabinet to instate a public holiday if the Matildas make the final round of the Women’s World Cup.
Speaking on 2Day FM earlier today, Albanese was asked if a public holiday would be on the way if Australia gets to the final.
He said public holidays are up to state and territory leaders, but he would be personally pushing for it:
We’ve got a national cabinet coming up next week. I’ll be clearly putting the argument and I reckon they’ll fold like tents. They will go one after the other.
Because if we can get there, that would be remarkable. It truly is the world game.
Updated
When Majella Card booked tickets to France to barrack for the Matildas in 2019, there were no support groups to follow the women on their World Cup tour.
So she formed one. Card estimates around 2,000 Australian fans were gathered in France back then, when the Matildas Active Support group started up.
Now that the tournament is in Australia, it’s expanded even further. The group has its own chants, spanning from Waltzing Matilda to Aussie Ole!, and always has two drums in the stands. It doesn’t matter if you’re a long-term A-League supporter or a newbie to the game, the only rules are inclusion and respect.
Card says:
The community was always there … but [this tournament] it’s definitely different.
We want to keep the atmosphere of what makes the women’s game fantastic, which is an inclusive, supportive culture. It’s about lifting up our team and trying to be really loud and proud. Not everyone wants to become a professional football player. A lot of people just want to be fans. And that’s where we try to step in.
Card and the crew have booked tickets to every possible outcome for the Matildas’ road to the finals. She remembers with fondness the raucous kick-ons to Swan Street in Richmond after the Matildas sailed through 4-0 to Canada in Melbourne. Many early 2000s bangers were played in a pub they took over. If all goes to plan, the bangers will be aplenty tonight.
To relive that famous win against Canada, read the match report from the Guardian’s Kieran Pender:
Updated
The US embassy in Australia has upped their GIF-game and shown its support for the Matilda’s ahead of tonight’s match, after the United States’ shock exit from the World Cup:
— U.S. Embassy Australia (@USEmbAustralia) August 7, 2023
Eager fans of the Women’s Football World Cup may boast having been to every Matildas game. Bonny, though, is on a whole different level.
Drinking a beer on the rooftop at Sydney’s Aurora hotel with a Matildas beanie and a cardboard sign hanging around her neck, she admits humbly:
I got tickets to every game. Then [my partner and I] decided where we wanted to go and sold what we didn’t need … we’ve still got our New Zealand tickets.
Asked how many of the 52 games played so far she’s been to, she replies: “I honestly don’t know.”
“She’s nuts”, a friend comments drily.
Bonny has already flown to New Zealand twice to watch the World Cup, including a trip that required her to leave the Canada v Australia game at half time.
She took a red eye to New Zealand in time to see the Netherlands take to the pitch:
It took me 15 hours to get to Dunedin.
And it was worth it because the Netherlands won 7-0 and I got two kits signed.
Bonny is the lucky charm of her mate’s friendship group tonight, having left the stadium in Melbourne prior to a further two Matildas goals.
“If we’re winning at half time,” a friend tells her, “you’re going.”
Updated
Excitement builds as kick-off draws closer for Matildas
On an ordinary Monday afternoon, Sydney’s Aurora Rooftop Hotel is quiet but for a smattering of office types in the downstairs sports bar.
Today, though, the pub is a sea of green and gold, filled with expectant fans nervously clinking pints of lager (or espresso martinis) ahead of tonight’s knock-out game against Denmark.
Nobody said it was going to be easy. For Fatima Flores, though, the dream almost died before it began.
Flores was celebrating a supposed goal kicked by Mary Fowler early in the must-win match against Canada before it was disallowed as offside. In the excitement, she fell and trapped her leg between a seat, requiring three support staff to unhook her.
“I’ve got big calves, like Sam Kerr”, she told security several times, as she was wheeled promptly to first aid.
Luckily, a friend of Flores got an iPhone up to watch the game as she was treated, and she was wheeled back to a corner seat by goal number three, where she celebrated Australia’s qualification at the top of its group with the official cheer squad, Matildas Active Support.
They were trying to get me to get a scan and I said I’m fine, I’m not going anywhere - I need to see the rest of this game. I got to see the rest of it, but I wasn’t on the drums. I just sat with my leg up … if that’s what I have to do to get the Matildas to win, that’s what I’ll do.
Updated
Thanks to Amy for taking us through a very busy day! I’ll be with you for the next few hours – let’s get into it.
We probably all need a respite from this Monday, so I will hand the blog over to Emily Wind who will take you through the rest of the afternoon – including some of the excitement which is building for the Matilda’s game tonight.
Politics Live will be back with you early tomorrow morning – thank you so much for joining us all and be sure to check back for the teams’ work. Until then – take care of you.
Incoming RBA governor tightlipped on rates
With Philip Lowe just weeks from bowing out as Reserve Bank governor, his successor Michele Bullock has been quietly hosting her own meetings ahead of taking over on 18 September.
We understand Bullock held a gathering with about 20 leading businesswomen on Friday in Sydney at an event hosted by Westpac.
Such gatherings, of course, are not rare even if they can be controversial - such as Lowe’s meeting of bankers after February’s interest rate rise before holding a public event to explain his thinking about where rates were going in 2023.
We’re told Bullock was careful to avoid saying anything sensitive about the outlook for rates. (At around that time, the RBA was releasing its quarterly statement of monetary policy, which trimmed the growth outlook for 2023 but suggested inflation was tracking lower, as it intended.)
One person at the event said Bullock was less open than Lowe, but that might change when she grows into the role.
Asked about how households struggling with high interest rates would cope if interest rates stay high for a while (as everyone expects), Bullock said the strong demand for labour would work in their favour. Those on lower wages are also getting higher than average pay increases (8% or more), and that will help.
Apparently nobody asked about whether the dollar might drop against other currencies if overseas central banks kept hiking rates while we stay on hold here.
Our freely floating currency, though, provides something of a self-correcting mechanism: a sharp drop in the dollar would drive up inflation via more expensive imports and the RBA would be inclined to raise rates or delay cuts.
Still, such an outcome would hardly be cheered on by mortgage holders hoping the bank’s cash rate has peaked.
Updated
Josh Butler has got to the bottom of the AI generated ads an unofficial no campaigner has released on Facebook:
Updated
When the Australian newspaper was asked last week about the media leak, the response was:
The Australian did not break an embargo.
We will also not reveal our sources.
Updated
Parliament to prohibit sexist, racist, homophobic and discriminatory language
A government-majority committee has recommended that standing orders be amended to make it clear sexist, racist, homophobic and discriminatory language is offensive.
It might seem a no-brainer but the standing orders as they stand simply say “a member must not use offensive words”.
It has also recommended strengthening the speaker’s powers to boot out misbehaving politicians, giving them an option to expel a member for three hours if there is “continued or escalating disorderly conduct”.
While the report’s first four recommendations were agreed upon by Coalition committee members, the latter two are a point of contention.
Liberal deputy chair Ross Vasta, and committee members Colin Boyce and Terry Young, did not support recommendations to use gender-neutral language, nor the creation of a house standing committee on gender equality, diversity, and inclusion.
Vasta said on Monday morning the switch to gender-neutral language was “unnecessary”, saying terms such as speaker and deputy speaker already existed.
In regards to setting up a diversity committee, the Coalition’s dissenting report said it would “stymie” parliament’s efficiency.
The recommendation that a house standing committee on gender equality, diversity, and inclusion examine every piece of legislation is clearly unworkable and would stymie the efficient passage of legislation through the parliament.
In addition, the Coalition notes that all legislation is prepared in accordance with a statement of compatibility with human rights which considers, amongst other things, the protection of discrimination [on] the grounds of sex.
Updated
In terms of the report and redactions, Andrew Barr says:
I need to be crystal clear that we will get on with the implementation of the recommendations, and that I have released the report, and the appendices. The only redactions are those made by Mr Sofronoff himself.
Q: Do you intend, then, to refer this to the Integrity Commission?
Barr:
I am looking at the options. One of the things – one of the things that should have been accorded, and is expressly provided for in the legislation – is a period to contemplate the findings.
There is a lot in this. Five months of work. Seven months since he was appointed. We are now seven days since we received the information. There is a lot to work through.
That is why the Act specifically provisions a reporting period and an appropriate time. That is why there is an interim report and response from the government today. We will have more to say on this. But that will be for later.
Updated
Asked about the appointment of Walter Sofronoff, Andrew Barr cuts off the question and says:
I don’t think there’s much value in going over all of that. He came highly recommended. I think there’s been a lapse of judgement here in relation to those actions.
Leaking of Sofronoff report ahead of official release ‘a significant lapse of judgment’, ACT government says
Andrew Barr is then asked if he has confidence in the report and he says:
Confident in the recommendations, that there are only 10 recommendations, and confident in those.
Confident that Section 26A of the report - which requires any potential adverse comments to be form forwarded to individuals named, to give them the appropriate opportunity to respond.
Confident that that occurred.
Confident that those responses were received. And that is all outlined in the appendices.
Confident in that.
Not confident in relation to the process around providing the information to journalists.
So I’ve made my views on that very, very clear. And then the further revelation in relation to the engagement with journalists in the course of the process.
I note that every single individual who was named and received a potential adverse comment had the opportunity to respond to those. That is important.
And that the report – the final report – is significantly different from that that was proposed.
So I have confidence that due consideration was given in relation to initial and then final. I think that is all fine. The process that I am concerned about is the leaking, and the potential engagement with journalists along the way through. I think both of those show a significant lapse of judgement.
Updated
Q: On that briefing of journalists, when Mr Sofronoff told you about that, did you get an idea of how frequently that was happening, the nature of those conversations, who they were with, how long they went for? And was this the first you heard of it?
Andrew Barr:
Certainly the first that I’d heard of it, although you could probably glean from some of the written commentary along the way through that certain things were either being very, very closely followed, or there was some discussion.
So that was all news to me.
I found out after I had been provided with the report that that had already been provided elsewhere.
Now, whether Mr Sofronoff was right to place his trust in those journalists, or one particular journalist, was right to assume that his confidences would be held - well, obviously it’s proven not to be the case. And the consequences of that are considerable. Now, this is a matter that has great media interest.
Q: You mentioned in your response that you’re seeking advice on the potential breach of the Inquiries Act. How long is that investigation going to take? Are you going to release the findings of that?
Andrew Barr:
We will consider our position in relation to that. I’m not making any pre-judgements at this point. I think there is a degree of objectivity that is required in assessing whether this constitutes a breach.
Interpretation - reasonably straight reading of Section 17 of the Act would clearly indicate that it is.
A question of whether there are any mitigating circumstances remains to be seen. I am concerned, equally, about the statement of effectively discussing matters that were to be before the inquiry the night before with journalists.
That, I think, is also concerning.
There are many possible pathways. It might be that a [reference to] the Integrity Commission to examine the conduct of the inquiry may be a pathway. Or it may not.
The government will seek advice on that. This should have drawn a line under this matter.
Unfortunately, whilst the recommendations, I believe, are sound and we have accepted them, the whole process - the leaking, the engagement with journalists on the way through - leaves, in the minds of many people, questions. Significant questions. And it is just so disappointing.
Q: Do you accept the explanation from The Australian that they received it through another means, and therefore didn’t break an embargo? What’s your view of that explanation?
Andrew Barr:
I am reminded of the film Muriel’s Wedding. When Bill Heslop says, “Deidre Chambers. What a coincidence’. What a coincidence indeed.
Q: When you made the inquiry of Mr Sofronoff after this occurred, what explanation did he give you for giving the report to one journalist before giving it even to you, and did he apologise?
Andrew Barr:
There’s been no apology at this point. He has sought to provide an explanation. That has been FOI’d. I have read...
Q: Can you give us the short version?
Barr:
I did, in my remarks. Essentially...
Q: He thought he could trust them? That doesn’t really say why he chose to do things -
Barr:
I think he had a view that the reporting might be more accurate if journalists were provided copies in advance, but he placed his faith, ah, in a particular individual, and that faith proved to be massively misplaced, to huge consequences for everyone.
Q: Mr Barr, given what you’ve raised about Mr Drumgold’s attempts to suppress parts of this...
Andrew Barr:
I should add, so have others, including representations on behalf of all of the police officers named in the appendices. It’s not just Mr Drumgolds - everyone, everyone,s who had adverse comments made about them contested them. That contest is there for everyone to see appendices. It is not just Mr Drumgold. It is everyone.
Q: Given that activity, do you think that Mr Sofronoff had a fear, and did he ever communicate that to the government, that his report was going to be suppressed or redacted in some way?
Barr:
No. Unequivocally, no. No. Unequivocally, no. I was very clear. He breached his good faith to me by releasing that report ahead of getting it to who he was meant to under the legislation.
Q: If that’s case the case, would you like to see him charged?
Barr:
We are considering our options, as I’ve outlined.
Q: You spoke about procedural fairness in general earlier. To what extent do you believe Mr Drumgold personally has been denied procedural fairness as he’s claimed? If so, what would have occurred over the month of August that now has been unable to occur?
Andrew Barr:
Well, he requested elements of the appendacy be redacted. He did have the opportunity, obviously, and there’s an opportunity to respond to the initial comments from Mr Sofronoff.
I had to be satisfied that that due process had occurred. I believe it has. Mr Drumgold’s further comments in relation to the leaking of the report have justification. He would have had the opportunity to prepare a further statement in relation to the matter. Now, he will still have that opportunity, and we have referred to that in the statement that we released today. So it remains open to him to do that.
Q: In that circumstance, is it your view that his reputation has already been damaged beyond a certain threshold, and that is what you’ve sought to avoid?
The Attorney-General had that discussion with Mr Drumgold, and the conclusion has obviously been reached on that matter.
Andrew Barr is then asked about the report being released to journalists – one ahead of the ACT government receiving it and two ahead of the report’s official release.
Q: Just referencing the Inquiries Act and the 26A potential breach that was spoken a bit about - it looks like it was quite clearly breached because, within that Act, it says that anyone that’s had adverse comments made about them should be given the opportunity to respond, and for that to even be included in the report - it’s simply not in there. That’s pretty clear. The second question about Walter Sofronoff - you said that he had confidence he could give it to journalists. Obviously something’s gone wrong there, hasn’t it? That’s incorrect?
Barr:
In relation to the first question, each of the notices of potential adverse comments were provided to individuals named. That is in the appendices that have been released.
So the formal notice under Section 26A, together with the nature of those comments, and then the reply.
I would observe that every individual who was the subject to potential adverse comments had something to say about that, and that there were significant changes from the potential comments to the final report. You’re able to see the changes by way of the publication of that appendix.
In relation to the second question - well, I’m sure Mr Sofronoff is not the first person who has had their confidences breached by that media outlet.
Updated
Back to the ACT press conference and Shane Rattenbury is asked about Shane Drumgold’s future and whether he faces any action and he says he has written to Drumgold to ask for a reply to the report.
Question time ends with everyone saying YTG ahead of the Matildas must-win match against Denmark.
Updated
Ley ejected from question time after accusing Marles of ‘mansplaining’
Back in parliamentary question time, and the Coalition is trying to draw Aukus into its voice scare campaign.
The Coalition’s defence spokesperson, Andrew Hastie, asks Linda Burney:
Will the voice be consulted on the location of Aukus submarine bases and nuclear waste facilities?
Burney, the minister for Indigenous Australians, replies:
Defence is not my portfolio, I’ll point out, and perhaps the minister for defence might like to take the question …
The imagination you have is commendable and the voice is about two things - it is about listening and it is about changing the practical outcomes for First Nations people.
Richard Marles jumps up to add:
The voice is not about defence. The voice is not about parking tickets. The voice is not about any of the issues that we’ve been hearing those opposite talking about.
Marles mentions the “enormous privilege” he had when he attended the the Yule River bush meeting in July (Josh Butler has covered that here):
The difference between the politics being played by those opposite here and the issues that were being raised at the Yule River bush meeting could not have been more stark.
The deputy opposition leader, Sussan Ley, jumps up to say:
Why is the deputy prime minister mansplaining to Sally?
The speaker, Milton Dick, tells the chamber:
The deputy leader has abused the standing orders in a pretty serious way and she’ll leave the chamber.
(The question referenced comments by Sally Scales, one member of the government’s referendum advisory group, that Aboriginal communities should be consulted on port and nuclear waste locations.)
Updated
The ACT attorney general Shane Rattenbury is also at this press conference.
He is asked about what is in the report in relation to ACT policing and whether there are any recommendations which will potentially address the actions of police moving forward:
Certainly the 10 recommendations that have been identified go to some of those specific issues you’ve talked about - about both the firming up of protocols, the clarity around some of those tests, and also improved police training to ensure that they have confidence where the inquiry found they didn’t at all times.
I think it’s also fair to reflect that, in his commentary, Mr Sofronoff notes that it was a difficult environment for police. They were seeking to go about their investigatory process and, because of the constant questioning, there was a pressure to reach a point of laying charges, and they felt that pressure.
And I think they reflect in their evidence that that did make it more difficult for them to do their work. On the point of the number of matters going to charge, that’s why I specifically spoke of the process that was in fact already in train, because those matters had been identified. And the government is working through that process.
Updated
Andrew Barr says the government’s focus will remain on the recommendations of the report:
I must stress that the government maintains confidence in the 10 report recommendations, and that our focus must remain on implementation. Canberrans rightly require confidence in their criminal justice system, and the institutions that uphold the law in the Territory. The recommendations in the report provide practical ways that the government and these institutions can ensure that the matters raised in the trial do not occur in the future.”
Updated
The ACT chief minister, Andrew Barr, is holding a press conference on the release of the Sofronoff report. In his opening statement, Barr says the government is considering whether the premature release of the report to select journalists was a breach of the Inquiries Act.
He then says he will “take this opportunity to confirm some facts”.
Mr Sofronoff has confirmed to me, in writing, that he provided a copy of the report to a newspaper columnist and a broadcast journalist. Each of them was given a copy upon express agreement by them that the copy was embargoed until the government had published it.
Mr Sofronoff also advised that he furnished a copy to the solicitor for Ms Brittany Higgins.
In his commentary to me, and by way of background information, Mr Sofronoff confirms that he “sometimes told journalists what appeared” to him “to be the issues that would arise on the following day’s hearings.
Sometimes the discussions were more general, such as concerning the conceptual interplay between the function of prosecutor and the function of investigative police.
He went on to advise me that, from his previous experience, as well as his experience in this inquiry, had led him to conclude that it was possible to identify journalists who are ethical and who understand the importance of their role in the conduct of a public inquiry.
He goes on to say that, in furnishing copies on this basis, it was limited to two journalists – each of these were professionals who he judged would not take the serious step of betraying his trust by behaving unprofessionally. The government has now sought advice on whether the premature release of the report constitutes a breach of the Inquiries Act and what further action is required.
Updated
Paul Fletcher then asks Anthony Albanese why he didn’t mention truth and treaty this year at Garma festival, when last year he did.
What changed?
Albanese takes it as a compare and contrast of Garma as a whole:
I tell you what was different between last year and this year, was last year at the Garma festival, the shadow minister for Indigenous Australians and the shadow attorney general was there and made a constructive contribution.
The member for Berowra was there and that gave I think the people at the Garma festival a great deal of hope that there was an opportunity to actually lift up this nation by responding positively.
Eventually Albanese gets to his point – that this year, the opposition front bench was not there.
Updated
Paul Fletcher seems even more Paul Fletcher today.
He interrupts a dixer from Mark Butler to say there was no invitation to compare and contrast in the question and Butler a “serial offender at this” is comparing and contrasting the Albanese government with the Morrison government.
Someone from Labor pipes up at the mention of ‘serial offender’ (Fletcher uses it often) and the manager of opposition business says:
“Because you are all serial offenders!”
The independent MP for Mayo, Rebekha Sharkie asks Mark Butler:
One in nine women suffer endometriosis, a condition that causes severe pelvic pain and sometimes infertility. Federal government has funded one endometriosis clinic for South Australia in Kadina. It is located 150km from Adelaide and where less than 1% of the South Australian population lives, leading women in my electorate in pain without services. When will the government fund a clinic accessible to the other 99% of South Australia’s women?
This is something the assistant minister Ged Kearney has been working on, but only ministers can answer these questions, not assistant ministers.
Butler says:
I thank the member for Mayo for her question and I know the assistant minister if standing orders were permitted will be delighted to answer this question. She has put in an extraordinary amount of work, along with members, frankly critically female members of parliament right across the aisle trying to work together on finding new ways to support women who deal with this incredibly difficult challenging often lifelong condition.
He goes on to say that there was a competitive process undertaken and the one clinic which succeeded was in Kadina. He invites Sharkie to have a conversation with Kearney:
The assistant minister is working very hard on ways and we can have an additional process for additional clinics. She will have more to say about that in due course, but I am sure the assistant minister would be very happy to have a direct discussion off-line with the member for Mayo about the that these programs are having critically on her constituency.
Updated
The Liberal MP for Hughes, Jenny Ware asks Linda Burney:
Will the minister [confirm] $900,000 has been spent on the Makarrata commission process?
Burney:
What the question relates to is investing in a better future for Indigenous Australians. The money that has been spent so far has been for NIAA resorting to progress our commitment to the Uluru Statement from the Heart. Looking for different ways to come together to bring people together, to move forward as a nation.
We are getting on with the job of delivering Indigenous Australians. We are delivering $100m to improve housing and infrastructure in the Northern Territory. 30 new dialysis units and training for 500 new health workers, birthing on country in Nowra, making childhood education more accessible, by increasing a number of subsidised hours to 36 hours per fortnight. This is an investment in the future of Indigenous Australians.
Updated
The story on the Sofronoff report has been published
Anthony Albanese:
The government does not release Office of National Intelligence assessments that are provided to the National Security Committee. The government doesn’t do that, and there is very good reasons why that has been the protocol over a long period of time from both sides of the chamber, no matter who has been in government.
But I made very clear, including in my speech to the Shangri-La dialogue in Singapore, which is the region’s and perhaps the world’s most serious gathering of national security and defence experts, including the heads of the defence ministers from, in that case, from dozens of countries, the heads of departments, we had of course general Campbell, the CDF was there as well as Greg Moriarty, the head of the Defence department.
I spoke there very clearly about my government’s position which is that consistent with the same position that the Biden administration has taken.
Climate change is a national security issue. We haven’t hidden that. We say it, we talk about it, we engage with the Pacific Islands Forum about why that is the case. We engage in all of our international forums, whether it be through the UN left CCC that has been attended by the minister, whether it be the recent meetings of Ausmin (Australia-US ministerial consultations) where I attended a meeting along with our foreign minister and defence minister, with the Defence secretary Lloyd Austin and Antony Blinken, the secretary of state for the United States, who when we met, in Brisbane, one of the things that we spoke about was climate change is a national security issue.
It is something that is a consistent theme not surprisingly from the world, and indeed, at the Nato summit, again, that was held in Lithuania, that was a constant theme as well was the impact of a change because it has an impact on food security, it is having an impact on migration, it is having an impact on so many areas of the globe, which is why we have two put it in that frame as well.
But the government does not release, and we make no apologies for not releasing national security advice, which appropriately goes to the National Security Committee. That is a position that we have had for a long period of time and that will remain the position.
Updated
Greens MP Elizabeth Watson-Brown asks Anthony Albanese about this:
The climate crisis is a massive risk to Australia’s and the world’s security. The White House has released its national intelligence analysis of the threats, but so far your government has refused to do the same. Prime minister, will you release a declassified version of the Office of National Intelligence’s national risk assessment provided to the government last year?
The short answer is, no.
Updated
Sussan Ley is back! What a great Monday this is.
My question is to the minister for Indigenous Australians: Can the minister confirm that, if the referendum is unsuccessful, that all work on a Makarrata commission and treaty will be ceased by the government?
Tony Burke has thoughts.
Mr Speaker, the way that question’s framed, it’s in breach, I put, of standing order 100d7 on a hypothetical matter.
Paul Fletcher has thoughts in reply.
Mr Speaker, clearly, it is a question about policy in the area that the minister squarely has responsibility for.
Milton Dick would just like everyone to get along. Or absent that, a rewording of the question.
Ley:
My question to the minister for Indigenous Australians: I refer to the $5.8m of funding within her portfolio budget allocation towards a Makarrata commission. Can the minister confirm that, if the referendum is unsuccessful, that all work on a Makarrata commission and treaty will be ceased by the government?
Linda Burney:
We intend to get a successful vote.
Updated
Jason Clare starts a dixer answer with:
Australia’s the best country in the world.
Fact check please.
The former deputy prime minister Michael McCormack is up next for the Coalition in question time:
My question is to the minister for the environment and water, who has federal responsibility for environment and water, just to be clear.
I refer to the minister’s question time statement last week: “We’re not proposing any takeover of state laws. We’re not proposing any duplication of state laws. Heritage protection will predominantly remain a matter for states and territories.” Given the West Australian government is set to scrap its cultural heritage laws, will the federal minister rule out federal mandatory national standards that require cultural surveys for farmers on their private property?
Tanya Plibersek:
I don’t know how often I can say to this place what I said every day last week in question time - we are not, for one moment, intending to take on the cultural heritage protection laws of any state or territory. That’s true of WA. It’s true of any other state that is doing cultural heritage protection reforms. We have our own process in place. That is a process that was begun by the former minister for the environment. The consultation with the First Nations heritage protection alliance begun by the former minister for the environment. We’re talking about updates to commonwealth laws. We’re not talking about duplicating, copying, adopting any WA laws.
The answer goes on, but just imagine an existential sigh and you’ll get the idea.
Updated
The government has declined to conduct a more detailed inquiry into the handling of past cases prosecuted by Shane Drumgold.
It said it has conducted a preliminary review of the 18 criminal cases that he has conducted or been involved in since 2019.
In a statement, the government said:
This examination has found that Mr Drumgold’s practice whilst DPP was appellate, meaning that the facts and evidence had already been determined and what was in issue was the findings or sentence based on those facts.
He appeared at first instance, or was briefed to appear at first instance, in only three matters. Of those three matters, two were not the subject of any significant dispute between the parties and one of these two involved a plea of guilty where the facts were agreed between the parties. The other matter involved a trial for murder of which Mr Drumgold had carriage until approximately 2 weeks before the trial commenced, at which point it was re-briefed to a private barrister who appeared as counsel for the prosecution during the trial.
Therefore, on the material available at this point, the government does not consider that a more detailed examination is warranted. Defendants in historic and current matters have the opportunity to raise any specific concerns through existing judicial processes.
Updated
Sofronoff inquiry finds Shane Drumgold ‘egregiously abused his authority’
The Sofronoff inquiry has made a series of damning findings about the conduct of ACT director of public prosecutions, Shane Drumgold, but found his decision to prosecute the case was the correct one on the basis of the available evidence.
The final report of the inquiry, released mid-afternoon on Monday, made several findings of misconduct against Drumgold. It found he lost objectivity at times and did not act with fairness and detachment” throughout the prosecution of Bruce Lehrmann for the alleged rape of Brittany Higgins.
The report found that he attempted to deny key documents to the defence, in which police expressed doubts about the case and Higgins, by making a “false claim of legal professional privilege” and that he “misled the court”. Sofronoff found there was “no doubt” that the documents should have been disclosed to the defence.
The report found that, by doing so, he “egregiously abused his authority and betrayed the trust of his young staff member” by directing them to draft a statement to support an inappropriate claim of privilege.
Higgins alleged Lehrmann, a former colleague, raped her in Parliament House in 2019. Lehrmann, who pleaded not guilty to one count of sexual intercourse without consent, has always denied the allegation of rape and no findings have been made against him.
Lehrmann was tried by the ACT supreme court in October but a mistrial was declared due to juror misconduct. Prosecutors later dropped the charges against him because of fears about the impact a second trial would have on Higgins’s mental health.
Updated
Linda Burney:
As I was saying, the government has allocated funding for a Makarrata in line with the commitment that we took to the last election. The funding has been allocated for the NIAA (National Indigenous Australians Agency) resourcing to progress our commitment to the Uluru Statement from the Heart, but we are not establishing a Makarrata before the referendum
Our priority is constitutional recognition through a voice. As Julie Bishop said at the Press Club, I believe that it is a step in the right direction, it is not a question of money, it is not a question of politicians coming up with policies. It is a question of giving Indigenous people the franchise to make decisions to implement policies that will work. We have got to give this a chance. And I agree with Julie Bishop.
Updated
Because the Coalition is mixing it up we now have Sussan Ley asking the third opposition question.
My question is to the minister for Indigenous Australians. $100,000 has already been spent on an independent Makarrata commission for national treaty making. What has this money been spent on?
Linda Burney:
I have asked about the elements of the Uluru Statement from the Heart. The government has allocated ...
Ley is back on her feet:
With respect on relevance, Mr Speaker, the minister has not been asked about the Uluru Statement from the Heart. The minister has been asked a specific question about a specific allocation of funding for a specific purpose, and it is not the first time she has been asked that question.
Tony Burke is NOT HAVING IT:
That was potentially the most absurd point of order I have ever heard. The last words that the minister said were the government has allocated ... And it was at the moment of saying the “government has allocated” that the deputy leader of the Opposition, in a prepared point of order, stands up simply to interrupter. It is an attempt simply to interrupt the minister, not to raise a point of order because the exact words that were being used could not have been more relevant.
Milton Dick says Burney was relevant. We continue:
Updated
ACT ‘seeking advice’ on whether early release of Sofronoff report was unlawful
The ACT government says it is examining whether the premature release of the Sofronoff inquiry final report was unlawful.
In a statement accompanying the release of the report, it says it remains “extremely disappointed” that the report was provided to two journalists prior to key parties. One of those journalists was handed the report before it was given to the chief minister, Andrew Barr.
The ACT’s Inquiries Act contains strict rules about how material from the inquiry can be handled and prohibits disclosure to outsiders.
The government is currently seeking advice as to whether the premature release may have constituted a breach of the Inquiries Act 1991 and if any further action is required.
The government will also consider changes to the Inquiries Act to strengthen provisions relating to the obligation of nondisclosure of information in section 17 prior to the formal release of an inquiry report. The intent of any changes will be to provide the ACT government and the Canberra community with assurance that the unapproved release that occurred on this occasion will not occur for any inquiry that may be commissioned in the future.
Updated
There is not much new in Catherine King’s comments about China’s barley decision, except the attempt to make political mileage with it.
King, representing the agriculture minister, says the Albanese government is seeking to improve access for Australian farmers and exporters while restoring relationships with trading partners that “the Liberals and Nationals frankly spent a decade trashing”.
She says the government has, in recent months, secured the removal of China’s impediments on Australian cotton, timber and horticultural products - “something I would have thought those opposite would be welcoming”.
King says while the scrapping of the tariffs on Australian barley is welcome, wine and beef are “still subject to impediments”.
Updated
Anthony Albanese continued:
Chris Kenny went on to say, “Yet now the Coalition’s scare campaign seeks to decry this as a secretive plot to render asunder the nation.” He went on to say this, “It is not a plausible – and it should not be taken seriously by media or political commentators. It insults the public. The people running the scares know full well they are talking about nothing more than an advisory body.”
He went on to say, “This truly is an attempt to turn Australians against each other.” That was Chris Kenny over the weekend. And if any of the frontbenchers from those opposite could have been bothered going to Garma on the weekend, what they would have seen was a unity from First Nations Australians asking to move forward together in the spirit…
… And he is out of time.
Updated
Angus Taylor quizzes PM on Makarrata commission fund
Because we are lucky ducks, we get Angus Taylor a little bit sooner than usual – the habit has been for Sussan Ley to get the second opposition question, but looks like the Coalition is mixing it up! What else will this Monday bring? We can hardly wait.
Taylor:
My question is to the prime minister: $900,000 has already been spent on an independent Makarrata commission for national treaty-making. Last week, the minister for Indigenous Australians, and the treasurer, refused to answer questions on how this money was spent. On Insiders yesterday, the prime minister failed to explain the expenditure three times. Prime minister, what has this money delivered?
Anthony Albanese uses the question to take a swipe at Peter Dutton and the Coalition front bench for their lack of attendance, saying if any could have been ‘bothered’ going to Garma on the weekend they would have learnt more about the Makarrata commission:
Now, makarrata, of course, is a Yolngu word. It’s a Yolngu word coming from Arnhem Land, from the traditional owners, that speaks about a coming together after conflict. That is simply what it means. So, makarrata is about promoting reconciliation. That is what it means. That is what it means. And we make no apologies for saying that. The idea of a makarrata that has been requested is, of course, a positive one. And, yes, we had measures in the budget for it. But of course, we’ve seen, over the weekend as well, some commentary as well from people who aren’t normally a cheer squad for the Labor party speaking about the tactics of those opposite. And they’ve said this: “We are talking about a government putting a referendum to the people to enact a reform designed to unify the nation and eradicate discrimination, a reform devised by Indigenous representatives, constitutional exports and politicians of all stripes across two decades of consultation.”
Updated
Albanese signals potential meeting with Xi Jinping at G20 summit
Anthony Albanese says it is in Australia’s interests to have a stable bilateral relationship wth China, and he is likely to meet again with China’s president, Xi Jinping, at the G20 summit in India next month.
The prime minister welcomes China’s decision to scrap the 80.5% tariffs on Australian barley, announced on Friday, and says it is the “culmination of over a year of work”.
He credits ministers Penny Wong and Don Farrell with taking a “calm, consistent responsible approach standing up for Australia’s interests”. The prime minister says Australia has made progress “without shifting any of our fundamental positions on trade, on security, on regional stability”. He says Australia will continue to speak up for human rights and the rule of law.
Albanese, who met Xi on the sidelines of the G20 in Indonesia late last year, says:
I’m sure that we will potentially meet again on the sidelines of the G20 meeting that will be coming up in the future.
Updated
We will go through that report and its response and bring you more of that very soon.
Sofronoff inquiry report into ACT prosecution of Bruce Lehrmann released
The ACT government has released the Board of Inquiry report.
Updated
Ahead of question time was this very not-awkward and natural photo, taken in front of the whispering fountain in the Parliament House lobby.
True equality is awkward politicians posing in awkward photos for both the men and womens’ teams. We did it Joe.
Carn the Tillies #TilitsDone pic.twitter.com/pr4obBFGnP
— Anthony Albanese (@AlboMP) August 7, 2023
Updated
Now to the questions.
Peter Dutton is straight out of the blocks:
Prime minister, Australians are witnessing an incompetent government that can’t explain its plans for a voice, can’t deliver its promised $275 annual cut to energy bills, has presided over 11 interest rate rises in over a year, and has no concrete plans to rescue families from our worsening cost-of-living crisis. When will the prime minister get across the detail and start prioritising ways to help families struggling with cost-of-living pressures?
Anthony Albanese sees the opportunity for a compare and contrast which he takes – it’s a hit list of the government’s best ofs, which his team are very prepared for, given the figures Albanese is reading from.
Updated
Joanne Ryan, the member for Lalor has been given the just before QT slot for a 90-second statement – which is the prime spot because it may mean you get televised ahead of the question time broadcasting beginning.
It was on the Australian Diamonds winning the Netball World Cup for what I think is the 12th time.
Anthony Albanese begins question time with the same topic:
We all know that diamonds are formed under pressure, and what you get at the end of the process is the toughest gem going. Well, that’s exactly what the Diamonds have been. They are world-beaters and absolute inspirations.
Being right before QT, it is of course time for 90-second statements.
Which means that when Paul Fletcher gets a slot, as he has today, he can live out his university debating glory days. Which he does. On the regular.
Updated
Minister releases homelessness paper
Housing minister Julie Collins has announced the issues paper for the government’s national housing and homelessness plan.
You can find all the details on that, here
The plan is part of the government’s defence that the housing Australia future fund is not the only action it is taking on housing.
Collins hints at that here, in her statement:
Too many people are struggling to find a safe and affordable place to buy, to rent or to spend the night.
Through the national housing and homelessness plan, we will set out how these issues can be tackled head-on by governments across the country with short, medium and long term reforms.”
Updated
Most Australians back more affordable housing, survey finds
The housing future fund continues to be an issue – Labor still doesn’t have the support it needs from the Greens to pass it. And, according to AAP, which has looked over an Australia Institute report, there is public support for what the Greens are trying to achieve:
Australians support higher spending on affordable housing and the introduction of rent caps, as research suggests they would also back a double dissolution election on the issue.
Labor reintroduced legislation last week to set up a $10bn housing Australia future fund after a first attempt was held up in the Senate.
The government’s proposed housing fund would deliver 30,000 social and affordable homes in its first five years, with 4000 for women and children at risk of domestic violence.
The plan was blocked by the Coalition and Greens in June, with the minor party demanding a nationally agreed rent freeze, more rights for tenants and increased funding for public housing in exchange for their support.
Progressive thinktank The Australia Institute conducted a survey of 1500 people, which found there was significant goodwill towards key housing measures.
It found almost 90% of people surveyed agreed the government should spend more money on affordable housing.
Three in four people supported the introduction of rent caps and wanted the commonwealth to work with state and territory governments on the matter via National Cabinet.
Updated
Parents for climate action also in Canberra
It’s not just doctors who are in town to try and urge the federal government to withdraw its Middle Arm funding – Australian Parents for Climate Action are also in Canberra with much the same aim.
Labor senator Malarndirri McCarthy is hosting the group with a delegation of NT parents arriving in Canberra to try and stop the expansion of the NT’s gas industry – in particular, fracking in the Beetaloo Basin and the Middle Arm processing plant.
Alice Nagy of Rapid Creek, said she made the trip to speak for the Northern Territory’s children:
As parents we want to have confidence that our elected decision makers are listening to expert advice and scientific consensus when they make any decisions, but especially when it comes to approving fossil fuel projects and large industrial developments such as those we are faced with in the NT.”
Updated
My, my, my how time flies when you are staring into the existential void – the first question time of the week is in less than an hour.
I think we know the subjects about to be covered off – it will be all about the voice, but don’t be surprised if national security gets a little look in too.
Pat Anderson says Aboriginal people deserve better than being an ‘ideological football’
PM Anthony Albanese went into similar ground on the weekend, when he said the voice would “fail at the first hurdle” if it were not put into the constitution. He noted that this was the specific request of Indigenous consultations in the Uluru statement, and rubbished the idea of setting up a consultation body that did not fit the specific wishes of Indigenous people.
Anderson stated: “Aboriginal people deserve better than to be an ideological football.”
A voice that is legislated only, outside the constitution, does not work for us. It makes us subject to the whims and fancy of the politics of the day.
Under a legislated voice we cannot plan for the future because there is no stability. It is a no man’s zone. Our organisations do not know whether they are funded from one government to the next and when there is a change of government we are back to ground zero.
Updated
Peter Dutton is ‘insulting Australians’, the Uluru dialogue co-chair says
Uluru Dialogue co-chair Pat Anderson AO has launched a stinging attack on opposition leader Peter Dutton, claiming he is “insulting Australians” with his stance on the Indigenous voice by only supporting a legislated voice to parliament, not a constitutionally-protected model.
A legislated voice is more of the same. It’s no change for us.
Anderson, one of the architects of the Uluru statement from the heart, has taken offence at the Liberal position of supporting an Indigenous voice only if it were set up solely by legislation, not enshrined in the constitution. She notes that extensive consultations with Indigenous communities over several years leading up to the Uluru statement had rejected the very position Dutton advocates.
First Nations called for a voice enshrined in the constitution. The voice comes from a historic consensus and is both symbolic and substantive recognition based on our experience with successive governments.
Dutton has not listened. He says he supports a voice but only on his terms. He has made up his own model. The rejection of symbolic recognition on its own was made clear in 2015 when the Kirribilli statement was released to Tony Abbott and Bill Shorten stating that symbolic recognition would not be acceptable. This was eight years ago.”
Updated
Teals move to level the playing field
Teal MPs are getting behind a push to level the political playing field to make it easier for grassroots campaigners to get into power.
On Monday, Curtin MP Kate Chaney introduced her restoring trust bill, which would lower the public disclosure threshold of political donations from $16,300 to $1000 and make details of them publicly visible on the Australian Electoral Commission register within five days.
Among the 13 proposed reforms, the bill would also legislate truth in political advertising - something her colleague Warringah MP Zali Steggall has been pushing for since the previous parliament.
The changes would “improve transparency, reduce financial influence and level the playing field”, Chaney said while introducing the bill on Monday morning.
We must be able to see where the money comes from before elections. We must reduce financial influence that could skew the decisions of government. And we must have a level playing field so new representatives can emerge if that’s what their communities want.
Updated
Questions over Garma attendance
In case you missed it from earlier in the day, Country Liberal senator and no campaigner Jacinta Nampijinpa Price was asked on ABC News Breakfast why Peter Dutton did not attend this Garma festival and said he had been ‘several times’ previously and did not need to.
Indigenous affairs editor Lorena Allam has looked at that claim:
Updated
Hazara advocacy group tells of deteriorating situation in Afghanistan
A Parliamentary Friends of the Hazara group was established earlier this year. It is chaired by Labor’s Andrew Charlton, independent MP Kylea Tink and the Greens Nick McKim.
The Australian Hazara Advocacy Network was invited to the parliament this week to speak about what is happening in Afghanistan this week:
On this solemn occasion at @ParlHouseCBR, we unite to raise our voices against Afghanistan's deteriorating humanitarian & human rights situation.Women, Hazaras & marginalised groups are bearing the brunt of the crises.We urge our government to continue its support for Afghanistan pic.twitter.com/UldQz8XCXj
— Australian Hazara Advocacy Network (@HazaraAdvocacy) August 7, 2023
Updated
Job ads increase with two key labour market figures yet to be announced
The latest job ads figures from ANZ and Indeed show there were slightly more (0.4%) ads for workers last month.
Compared with last September’s peak rate, we have seen the number of ads trail off about 10%. Still, given that period included eight interest rate rises by the Reserve Bank, the tally is holding up quite well.
Job ads edged higher last month and remain about 10% lower than their peak in September 2022. Some softening but no sign the jobless rate is set to spike. (Source: @ANZ_Research, Indeed) pic.twitter.com/BBkbZZ28wq
— @phannam@mastodon.green (@p_hannam) August 7, 2023
The demand for labour is yet to nudge wages up as much as inflation, although the gap might finally be narrowing - a bit.
On 15 August, we’ll get the June quarter wage price index numbers, which will probably show an annual increase of about 4%, still shy of the 6% headline consumer price inflation for the period. (In the March quarter, the gap was 3.7% versus 7%.)
Two days later, on 17 August, we’ll get July labour market numbers which, if the jobs ads are any guide, should show the unemployment rate remaining arounds about 3.5%.
Those two batches of data will be watched closely by RBA governor Philip Lowe who has just one more board meeting to oversee - on 5 September - before he’s replaced by his current deputy, Michele Bullock.
Updated
Lehrmann trial judge issues rare warning
The trial judge who presided over the prosecution of Bruce Lehrmann has warned that the personal toll of attacks on lawyers has become “oppressive and unfair”.
ACT supreme court chief justice Lucy McCallum issued a note to the territory’s lawyers on Monday, saying public scrutiny of the justice system was welcome.
But she also warned that “a point can be reached where the personal toll” on lawyers becomes “oppressive and unfair”.
McCallum did not say who she was referring to. Her full statement says:
The administration of justice in the ACT has been the subject of unprecedented attention in the past year. While public scrutiny is a welcome and necessary incident of open justice, a point can be reached where the personal toll on the practitioners concerned becomes oppressive and unfair. I urge all practitioners to show kindness and respect towards each other at this time and look forward to continuing to work with the local legal profession to build on the many strengths of this jurisdiction.
It is rare for sitting judges to make public statements about media coverage.
Shane Drumgold SC, the Director of Public Prosecutions who ran the Lehrmann trial, has been the subject of significant media criticism in recent months. The criticism has been heightened in recent days ahead of the release of the final report of the Sofronoff inquiry.
Lehrmann pleaded not guilty and his trial was abandoned due to juror misconduct. A second trial did not proceed.
Updated
Labor has announced a further crackdown on tax avoidance in the wake of the PwC revelations but Liberal senator Andrew Bragg has released a statement saying without more transparency from Asic, it won’t do enough to solve the problem.
Bragg through a senate committee has been trying to get access to documents about what Asic had been doing about the PwC case and has been getting nowhere. He says more transparency is needed to ensure that there is the correct actions being taken.
Law enforcement is more important than piling new laws onto the ever growing statute books. Unless the Government is serious about fixing ASIC and corporate law enforcement in Australia, the new initiative is dead on arrival.
Expect to hear more on security bill
Amy has just beaten me to it – but for those following the debate earlier on the security legislation in the Senate - it has passed the upper house without amendments (Ayes 37; Noes 25).
Expect to hear much more from the Coalition about this - it’s crying foul on the expansion of numbers on the parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security, which it believes will pave the way for a crossbencher - perhaps Andrew Wilkie - to be appointed.
Updated
National security bill passes
The senate has passed the national security bill Daniel Hurst has been keeping you updated on – without amendment.
The National Security Legislation Amendment (Comprehensive Review and Other Measures No. 2) Bill 2023 has passed the #Senate without amendments https://t.co/KA2reO3Rsz
— Australian Senate (@AuSenate) August 7, 2023
Updated
Doctor delegation to descend on Canberra
There is a delegation of doctors headed to parliament house –almost 100 will descend on the parliament in what Independent Dr Monique Ryan said was the largest delegation of doctors to come to parliament, to ‘sound the alarm’ over the Middle Arm gas project in Darwin.
Led by Darwin paediatrician Dr Louise Woodward, the group are warning of increased cancer rates and other “devastating health consequences” if the project goes ahead and want the federal government to commit to not funding it.
The doctor delegation is supported by the crossbench, including Dr Ryan and are headed to the federal parliament after the Northern Territory government refused to meet with Dr Woodward and the 40 other local paediatricians she brought with her.
There is a rally planned for outside parliament at 8am tomorrow and then meetings with 45 MPs and their staff in a bid to convince the Labor government to pull its $1.5bn in funding for the project.
We will have more on that tomorrow.
Updated
Opposition amendments to security legislation fail
The opposition’s amendments to the government’s security legislation have failed (the Coalition wanted to set in stone the requirement that only Labor and Coalition members serve on the parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security).
The chamber moved on to some amendments proposed by the Greens, who have raised concerns about plans for Asio to be able to access and use information about individuals’ “spent convictions”.
The Greens senator David Shoebridge asked whether there were any safeguards, saying “it just seems to me that we hope and pray that the security apparatus - Asio - will behave appropriately”.
The government minister Murray Watt told the chamber:
The minister’s guidelines for Asio require Asio to do things proportionately and reasonably and that is a legal requirement on Asio officials … abuse of these powers would not be proportionate and reasonable.
The Coalition senator James Paterson said the inspector general of intelligence and security had strong oversight powers. He said if Asio had a role in issuing top-secret security clearances it may be relevant whether an individual had a conviction, even if it was “spent”.
Shoebridge’s amendment - to strike out the spent convictions part of the legislation - has also failed. Another amendment from the Greens on the jurisdiction of the ombudsman has also failed.
Updated
Peak dental body unveils national consensus statement
New recommendations from the peak body for dentists warn that vaping is harmful to the health of Australians’ teeth and mouths.
The Australian Dental Association this morning updated its national consensus statement for the first time since 2009. Dr Mihiri Silva, from the dental school at the University of Melbourne, who led the review, said:
There’ve been so many advancements in the last few years about the effects, for example, of lifestyle habits like vaping and alcohol consumption that existing recommendations needed an overhaul to reflect the latest findings and catch up with international guidelines.”
The new Oral Health Consensus now explicitly states “e-cigarettes… are harmful to oral health.”
Research has shown that e-cigarettes can damage teeth and gums, and lead to mouth and throat discomfort.
The statement unveiled by the assistant health minister Ged Kearney was based on the input of around 70 experts including dentists, doctors, nurses, policy makers, consumer advocates as well as experts in paediatric dentistry, fluoride, medicine, vaping, sports, and sugar.
It also includes new recommendations that alcohol is harmful to oral health, and recommends custom-made mouth-guards should be worn for all sports and training where there is a reasonable risk of a mouth injury and that children should have their first visit to the dentist starting from the time they lose their first tooth.
Updated
Former Greens leader Bob Brown will be in the parliament today to talk native forrest logging. He will hold a press conference with Sarah Hanson-Young and Janet Rice a little bit later this afternoon.
Updated
Rental vacancies down across the country
It is homelessness week this week – and one thing which has made it even harder for people to secure housing is the tightness of the housing market. This news doesn’t make it any easier; there has been a significant drop in rental vacancy rates across the country this month, according to market analytics from Suburbtrends.
According to the data, the market has adjusted downwards and decreases have been recorded in every capital city. This follows an uptick in vacancies in June, a trend that Suburbtrends founder Kent Lardner described as “more of a blip”.
In NSW the Northern Beaches experienced the steepest decrease, dropping from 3.60% to 2.68%, driven primarily by lower vacancies in Manly, Dee Why and Mona Vale.
Meanwhile in Victoria, Inner Melbourne noted the biggest decrease, falling from 3.50% to 2.68% in July, with fewer vacancies in Carlton, Fitzroy and Richmond.
Lardner said the tightening rental market will be disheartening news for many renters:
This decrease in vacancy rates could make it more challenging for potential renters to find suitable properties.
While the trend may not come as a shock, especially for those actively searching for a rental property, it certainly doesn’t make their task any easier.”
Updated
Lambie says current debate on intelligence committee membership is a ‘smackdown’
Jacqui Lambie said that wasn’t actually the question she asked. Lambie said she and other members of the crossbench had previously been trusted to receive private briefings from government officials on national security matters, including when the Coalition was in power, and said she had never leaked those contents. She felt this was in contrast with the “smackdown” on the crossbench in the current debate on the PJCIS.
James Paterson said he respected Lambie’s “career of service to our country prior to coming to this parliament and your work in this parliament, particularly on defence issues and on veterans’ affairs issues”.
Paterson went on to say:
It is only us [the Coalition and Labor] who has the burden of having to live with the implementation of the recommendations that committees like the PJCIS implement. It is only us who has to take the responsibility at an executive level for keeping this country safe. And it is on the parties of government where responsibility will fall if something ever goes wrong. And because of that burden, I believe it is appropriate for it to be the parties that have traditionally served in government to continue to hold this responsibility.
Lambie hit back to say the major parties’ numbers in the parliament are decreasing:
They way they’re going their numbers will continue to decrease, and you are going to have more crossbench up here ... [They] know very well their power is decreasing every time we go to an election.
Updated
Lambie fires up about intelligence and security committee membership
Back to that debate in the Senate about who should get to be on the parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security (PJCIS). Tasmanian senator Jacqui Lambie is unhappy about some of the contributions from the Coalition’s James Paterson. Paterson had said the PJCIS should maintain its collaborative ethos by only being formed by members of the “parties of government” (that means the Coalition and Labor).
Lambie asked Paterson:
I would like you tell me why you think you can do a better job on national security than what some of us crossbench can do - especially with what some of us have in our background? Because quite frankly I think there’s a few of us feeling quite offended here. So can you tell me why you believe the red and the blue team can do a better job on national security than what the crossbench can?
Paterson replied:
I understand why intuitively an amendment like this would be appealing to the crossbench. It does, on paper, offer you the opportunity theoretically to serve on this committee. But all I can say is what I said in the second reading debate: if the prime minister hasn’t already called you and offered you a position on the committee, it’s not you that he intends to appoint, because I believe he has made that offer already to a member of the cross bench.
Updated
The role of consultants in government and whether the public is getting its money’s worth is the subject of a Senate inquiry due to report by the end of November.
Over the weekend we covered one area of consultants’ activity that hadn’t had much attention: the Bureau of Meteorology‘s “Robust” program:
There’s never been a full cost made public for the program which was originally sparked by a 2015 hack of the bureau by “foreign spies”.
Insiders tell us that there are on-going problems with implementing the various security check while also making it impossible to deploy a new super computer (dubbed “Australis II”) that has been blinking away but otherwise unused for a couple of years.
The Albanese government inherited the project from its predecessors, and says the bureau has enough funds in its kitty to fix it.
The trouble is, what services have been cannibalised in the process? And what if any clauses allow the government to claw back money from Deloitte, Accenture and other consultancies if they have not met contract requirements? (Both say they don’t comment about clients.)
Perhaps senate question time this week might extract a few more answers.
MPs behaving badly face longer stints in the sin bin
I am still yet to be convinced it is a punishment to be booted out of the House of Representatives for bad behaviour, but as AAP reports, there is a possibility MPs could be sent out for longer under proposed changes to parliamentary rules:
Recommendations to change the workplace culture of Parliament House laid out in the landmark Set the Standard report were presented on Monday.
Parliament’s procedures committee has recommended six changes, including eliminating offensive and discriminatory language in parliament and harsher penalties for MPs behaving badly.
Disorderly MPs can be kicked out of the House of Representatives by the Speaker for one hour for repeated bad behaviour.
But committee chair Shayne Neumann said the length of time MPs can be booted for should be increased to three hours for more serious offences.
“The one-hour withdrawal is not a significant deterrent of poor behaviour,” he told parliament.
“A three-hour penalty would mean a badly behaved member is more likely to miss speaking opportunities and important votes and should help the Speaker address disorderly conduct.”
Updated
Greens say it’s ‘laughable’ for Coalition to want crossbenchers excluded from intelligence and security committee
The Senate debate on national security oversight is heating up, with the Greens saying it is “laughable” for the Coalition to claim crossbenchers should be excluded from a key parliamentary committee.
As Amy flagged here on the blog earlier, the Senate is debating changes to expand the number of members of the parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security (PJCIS).
The Coalition’s home affairs spokesperson, James Paterson, told the chamber the opposition believed that this expansion of the PJCIS is being made “for the purpose of putting a member of the crossbench or a minor party on the committee”.
Paterson appealed to the government to “maintain the bipartisan culture and ethos of the PJCIS” by ensuring its members remained from “the parties of government” - meaning Labor and the Coalition. (Typically the members are just from the major parties, but the independent MP Andrew Wilkie did serve on the committee during the Gillard minority government.)
Paterson said the Coalition is open to ensuring the security agencies are subject to broader and deeper oversight by PJCIS, “however not at the expense of operational security”. Paterson said:
It is our view that the expansion of the PJCIS to include crossbenchers puts that operational security at risk and we are not prepared to support this bill or any other bill that puts that at risk.
The Greens senator David Shoebridge said it was “quite remarkable seeing a major political party urging the government of the day” to maintain a “political club”. Under the protection of parliamentary privilege, Shoebridge told the Senate:
They use this term parties government as though the Coalition is to be trusted. This is the same political party that made Scott Morrison the prime minister, who had so many breaches of integrity, so many fundamental breaches of integrity that the entire nation, except for a tiny subset of hard-right ultras in the Coalition, breathed an enormous sigh of relief that he was no longer in a position to have access to that kind of information. This is the same Coalition that in its fringe cooker section is working on Qanon conspiracies and sharing Qanon conspiracies as part of their political project. And the Coalition says that they are somehow a trusty set of hands on national security.
Paterson responded by thanking Shoebridge “for perfectly illustrating how ill-equipped the Greens political party is for being members of this committee”.
Updated
We are expecting the public release of the ACT board of inquiry report into the prosecution of Bruce Lehrmann to be handed down shortly (some time today).
We will bring you those updates as soon as they are available.
Updated
Don Farrell on EU free trade negotiations: ‘The Europeans were offering too little and demanding too much’
And Daniel Hurst has also covered this off previously, but for the record why did the free trade negotiations with the EU fall apart?
Don Farrell:
Look, the Europeans were offering too little and demanding too much. It was a pretty simple process. I wouldn’t describe it as having broken off; we did agree that we would continue the negotiations, and I’m hopeful that at a mutually convenient time, some time this month, we can continue those negotiations.
They’re important for Australia, but we’ve said all along that we want meaningful access to European agricultural markets, and we’re going to continue to say that until such time as we get an agreement.
Updated
Farrell asked about detainment of Australian citizens Cheng Lei and Yang Hengjun
Don Farrell:
It’s a terrible situation, that they should be under arrest in China. In all of my discussions with my counterpart I’ve raised the issue, and I know the prime minister and the foreign minister have done the same. We continue to make representations on behalf of those individuals, and keep our fingers crossed that we can resolve those issues.
Updated
Trade minister asked about long-term plan for trade tariffs: ‘the way forward is to ensure diversification’
Don Farrell was on ABC radio AM this morning, where he was asked how long it might take for China to remove the trade tariffs on Australian wine.
He said:
Well, we’re hoping to do that as quickly as possible. I’ve said, right from the time that we decided to suspend the barley dispute at the WTO, that if that was successful, and of course last Friday it was successful - the Chinese government lifted the 80.5 per cent tariff on Australian barley. I’ve indicated that I believe that’s then a template to deal with the issue of wine. So we’ll be seeking to have some further discussions with my Chinese counterpart to see how quickly we can make progress on the issue of wine tariffs.
(Daniel Hurst has covered that off late last week)
But given there are other trade tariffs to contend with, what is the long-term plan?
We’ve said right from the start that we think the way forward is to ensure diversification. That doesn’t mean selling any less to China, what it means is that we expand our trading relationships. In the last few months, we’ve established a free trade agreement with India, a very important market, you know, the world’s largest population now, and with the United Kingdom. The difficult one, of course, is the EU - 450 million people, and a $24 trillion economy. We’re working hard there to try and resolve some of the outstanding issues and get a free trade agreement with the Europeans.
Updated
Apparently it is also rail safety week, which is hard to tell from this photo
I’m proudly supporting Rail Safety Week.
— Catherine King MP (@CatherineKingMP) August 7, 2023
It’s an important reminder to to always stay behind the yellow line and
Stand back. Look up. Stay Rail Safe. pic.twitter.com/8BG9W09I2W
Not pictured: rail safety. However it does help clear up what badge/ribbon MPs will be wearing today.
You know things are serious when there is a slick social media video produced.
This year on referendum day let’s vote Yes for Recognition, let’s vote Yes for a Voice and let’s vote Yes for the better future that both will deliver, for us all. pic.twitter.com/6Ir0DiLA0k
— Anthony Albanese (@AlboMP) August 6, 2023
Senate squabbles over adding Andrew Wilkie to parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security
Over in the Senate and the morning outrage is over the government national security bill, which seeks to expand the parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security (it is a bit of a rule that you have to preface any mention of the PJCIS with “powerful” but we are rule breakers from way back here) by another member who is not a major party MP. It is most likely to be Andrew Wilkie in this case.
The Coalition is outraged is a complete sentence these days, but the security minded members of the Coalition are not in support of this because they say it will increase the likelihood of leaks. The PJCIS tends to be largely bipartisan, with the committee banding together to improve legislation around national security and the like, and usually governments accept their recommendations to change legislation (I say usually because the Morrison government did not adopt all the recommendations put forward by the committee, which is a Rare Event indeed).
The government says expanding the committee is about increasing scrutiny over national security bills and the parliament picks who is on the committee and so far that has worked out just fine.
The bill will also make it that only Asio can vet people for national security clearance (so no consultants) which makes sense.
Updated
Chaney on donation caps: ‘a very controversial area’
Independent MP for Curtin, Kate Chaney, is in the House of Representatives introducing a crossbench electoral law reform bill.
Key elements of the bill include:
Requiring real-time disclosure of political donations over $1,000
Legislating truth in political advertising
Banning current or potential substantial commonwealth contractors from making political donations (covers the Big Four consultants)
Requiring unions and publicly listed companies to gain members/shareholder approval before making political donations
But the bill does not include caps on political donations or expenditure, two key elements of legislation the Albanese government is expected to seek to enact before the next election. The idea is controversial, because some independents, including Chaney, argue MPs and major parties have the benefit of incumbency so outsiders need to spend more to break into parliament.
Chaney spoke earlier at a presser with a huge crossbench contingent including Teal independent MPs, Greens senator Larissa Waters, independent senator David Pocock, Helen Haines, Andrew Wilkie and Dai Le.
Chaney said:
This bill doesn’t go into caps. I acknowledge that there’s too much money in politics and people want to see an end to that. It’s pretty hard to find a model that works on caps because while we don’t want to see that money in politics people also want to know they have a choice, so getting that balance right is going to be very challenging ... Caps are a very controversial area, there’s more work to be done on that, but these are 12 reforms that have really broad support across civil society.
Updated
Independent Kate Chaney to introduce restoring financial integrity bill
The Curtin independent MP will introduce her restoring financial integrity bill, with the support of most of the crossbench.
The bill is similar to one the Greens have introduced and seeks to do much the same thing – limit who can donate and increase transparency around political donations.
The bills would need the support of a major party to get anywhere though and so far, that is not happening.
Updated
Plibersek v Joyce continued
Plibersek:
And can I say to your viewers …
Joyce:
… I listen to the prime minister of Australia as well.
Plibersek:
Spend half an hour, Google Yes 23.
Joyce:
Oh, this is not true. The prime minister of Australia has said he will deliver the Uluru Statement of the Heart in full, and that includes a treaty. That includes a treaty. You’ve got to either believe the prime minister or not. And if you want to clear up …
Plibersek:
… That’s not what we’re voting on.
Joyce:
… our scare campaigns* then one of the things you should do is deliver the legislation for the voice for the examination by the Australian people prior to them walking into the constitutional church to marry it forever, because that’s what’s going to happen. You’re going to show it to us on the way out. We want to see it on the way in, not on the way out.
*Saying the quiet bit out loud.
Updated
Tanya Plibersek to Barnaby Joyce on the voice: Coalition is ‘muddying the waters’
The enduring trials of Tanya Plibersek continue with her weekly “debate” with Barnaby Joyce on the Seven Network. Today’s episode of “Barnaby Joyce bulldozes another conversation while you eat your Just Right” was on the voice to parliament.
Plibersek was asked about treaty and said:
We’re not determining any of that right now, we’re determining one simple question: do we change our constitution to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and do we set up a committee that would give advice?
I don’t understand why Barnaby’s so threatened about this. His former colleague Andrew Gee left the National party because of this scare campaign. He pointed out that the Coalition are going to be reconciliation wreckers and that’s what’s happening here. They’re muddying the water with every sort of other, you know, ‘This might happen. That might happen’. Two simple questions: do we change the constitution to include Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people? Do we set up a committee that can give advice? It has no power of veto …
Joyce:
That’s not true. That is not true.
Plibersek:
No power of veto. It is true. Read the question.
Joyce:
No, I do, and I also listen to the …
Updated
Butler accuses Liberals and pharmacy lobby of ‘cynical scare campaign’ over medicine dispensing changes
Mark Butler did have a little more to say about the backlash to the 60-day dispensing changes though:
I’ve read in the newspaper another scare campaign from the pharmacy lobby and the Liberal party, which I’m desperately worried about. They’ve tried a range of cynical scare campaigns to counter this measure.
First, they said it would be unsafe and that was debunked.
Second, they said it would lead to medicine shortages and all of the medicines experts debunked that scare campaign as well.
But I’m really shocked that this morning, the pharmacy lobby and the Liberal party have tried to scare vulnerable aged care residents that they would have to pay extra because of this measure to save 6 million patients from having to get their prescription filled every single month.
This is a cynical scare campaign from the pharmacy lobby that should be rejected. Certainly, the government rejects it. We are determined to deliver this cheaper medicines reform for 6 million patients and we’re determined also to protect aged care residents in the same process.
Expect this to pop up in question time today.
Updated
Government to bring forward negotiation of pharmacy agreement in response to backlash over dispensing changes
The health minister, Mark Butler, has announced the government will be bringing forward the next Community Pharmacy Agreement negotiations by 12 months. That is in response to the backlash from pharmacies over the government’s 60-day dispensing changes – which means people will save up to $180 in their medications for chronic illnesses, as well as fewer doctor appointments and less travel, but the pharmacy will miss out on government dispensing fees. The money the government saves from the switch to 60 days is to be reinvested in community pharmacies (about $1.2bn over the forwards) but that has done little to allay the fears of the pharmacy guild.
So now the new agreement negotiations will begin a year earlier to try to see if everyone can calm their farm a little.
Butler:
They were expected to start from July next year, for a new agreement to take effect in 2025 but I’ve taken the view and I’ve heard the soundings from the Pharmacy Guild that we need to deliver that business certainty to pharmacies sooner than that. So, we’ve determined, as a government, that we’re willing to sit down with the guild now and start negotiations early to secure a new agreement, a new five-year agreement for the community pharmacy sector.
Updated
More people at risk of homelessness for first time, says St Vincent de Paul Society president
It is Homelessness Week and this year’s theme is pretty simple: “It’s time to end homelessness”.
The St Vincent de Paul Society’s national president, Mark Gaetani, said cost-of-living pressures mean people who have never accessed the society’s services before are now asking for help in droves, with many at risk of homelessness for the first time.
More and more people are seeking emergency relief to cover the basics, such as food vouchers, while they prioritise accommodation costs over other essentials. These are choices Australians should not have to make.
Gaetani said the society was being asked to help with rental and accommodation options, as well as help with rental arrears as people tried to avoid eviction. Others were already couch-surfing or living in cars, tents or caravan parks.
Today’s reality is that people in crisis accommodation are on an endless cycle, forced to transition from one form of temporary accommodation to another simply because there are too few affordable and permanent housing options.
The statistics on homelessness are damning. One in seven are children, one in five identify as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander, and 23 per cent are aged 12 to 24 years.
He says that charities cannot be expected the solve the problem and “all governments” need to do more.
Updated
NSW Greens and Invasive Species Council back proposed aerial culling of wild horses
The New South Wales Greens have welcomed the government’s proposed plan to allow aerial culling of wild horses in the Kosciuszko national park.
Greens environment spokesperson, Sue Higginson, said:
It is heartbreaking that the feral horse issue in Kosciuszko NP has become so bad that culling is the only option, but it is an action that should be available if necessary and the experts are telling us it is now necessary. There is no graver animal welfare issue than extinction and without effective and efficient control of feral horses, that is what we are looking at.
The Invasive Species Council also supports the announcement from the government, insisting that all available tools needed to be considered in the fight to protect threatened species.
Council advocacy manager, Jack Gough, said:
No one likes to see animals killed, but the sad reality is that we have a choice to make between urgently reducing the numbers of feral horses or accepting the destruction of sensitive alpine ecosystems and habitats, and the decline and extinction of native animals.
If we want to protect the Snowy Mountains, headwaters of the mighty Murray, Murrumbidgee and Snowy Rivers and home to more than 50 threatened species like the corroboree frog and mountain pygmy possum, then we need to dramatically reduce feral horse numbers now.
Updated
The parliament sitting will begin from 10am, for those hanging out for parliament proceedings news.
NSW government considers aerial shooting of wild horses in Kosciuszko
Aerial shooting is being considered by the New South Wales government as part of measures to control the wild horse population in Kosciuszko national park.
The state’s environment minister, Penny Sharpe, has this morning announced the government is seeking feedback on proposed amendments to the park’s wild horse management plan.
Aerial shooting is being considered, alongside existing methods of trapping and rehoming and ground shooting.
Sharpe said:
Kosciuszko national park is the largest national park in NSW. It has Australia’s tallest mountains, rugged landscape and plants and animals found nowhere else in the world. It’s one of the jewels of our national parks crown but it is in grave danger. Precious ecosystems and endangered native species and their habitats are at risk of extinction due to introduced animals, including wild horses.
She said the government had an “obligation to save” the more than 30 threatened native species in the park and is asking park users, scientists and community leaders for their input until 11 September.
Updated
PM congratulates Australian netball team on World Cup win
And the timezone has been against them, but the Diamonds won the Netball World Cup last night and Anthony Albanese gives them a shout out as well, saying they have done the nation proud:
They have indeed … certainly, a considerable defeat inflicted on the English. And congratulations to the Diamonds who’ve been such an extraordinary team leading the world winning yet another World Cup.
All in all, Yeah the Girls.
Updated
Albanese says his attendance at Matildas’ must-win game unlikely
After the US World Cup team was taken out of the competition by the metric system overnight, (the goalline technology confirmed Sweden’s Lina Hurtig’s penalty crossed the goalline by a millimetre, which knocked the US out) Anthony Albanese is asked whether he will be at the Matildas’ must-win game tonight against Denmark:
Talk about small margins, not even a hair between 😳 pic.twitter.com/5UIym41oi2
— Beth Mead MBE (@bmeado9) August 6, 2023
I don’t think I am. There’s been a late request for me to go but parliament’s sitting this week, so it will prove to be difficult. I watched last week in front of the telly, and that was absolutely a fantastic experience. I don’t think we can hope for four-nil tonight, I think we’d settle for one-nil, will do. But the Matildas are doing the whole of Australia proud. And I’m sure the whole of Australia will be cheering wherever they are, whether they’re at the game or watching on telly tonight.
Updated
‘People will wonder why it hasn’t happened before’ if voice is successful, says Albanese
Anthony Albanese was also asked whether the voice result would reflect on him personally and said:
No, this is not about politicians, this is about whether we close the gap, whether we make a difference for Indigenous Australians. And this is an issue that has been spoken about for a very long period of time.
We’ve been speaking about a voice since William Cooper back in the 30s was talking about this form of structure.
We’ve been talking about constitutional recognition since John Howard and Kevin Rudd both went to the 2007 election with that position.
We’ve had governments or political parties across the spectrum say that they wanted to advance constitutional recognition for decades now.
Now, I am the prime minister who is saying we need to give Australians the opportunity here to move forward and to have a vote. And I think that is the right thing to do, it’s something that’s been requested by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, it’s a gracious request, and I sincerely hope that Australians take it up.
And if they do, we will see, just like with the Mabo decision, the Wik decision, the apology to stolen generations, when it’s done, people will wonder why it hasn’t happened before.
Updated
Australia the only former colony without constitutional recognition for first peoples, PM says
Back to the prime minister’s radio blitz this morning and Anthony Albanese has of course been asked about the falling support for the voice. The PM has likened it to people saying Labor couldn’t win the 2022 election. He told ABC radio Brisbane:
There’s a long way to go in this campaign, of course. I remember people telling me that there was no possibility Labor would win the last election and I’m speaking to you from the Lodge.
So, people will concentrate on what the question is that is before the Australian people in the last quarter of this year, which is something that is about completing our constitution by recognising First Nations people in our constitution as Australia’s first peoples. The rest of the world, former colonies have all done that some time ago. We’re the only country that hasn’t.
And then secondly, just enabling a body, an advisory body so we can listen to Indigenous Australians about matters that affect them so as to get better results – that’s what this referendum is about. There’s been a whole lot of noise about things that it’s not about, but it’s a simple proposition.
Anthony Albanese's defence of poor Voice polling that polls pre 2022 election suggested Labor would lose is bizarre.
— Paul Karp (@Paul_Karp) August 6, 2023
Labor hit the lead in 2PP at the end of 2020/start of 2021 and never fell behind in the 1.5 years to the election.
There was a slight dip in the last few months, possibly due to a messy campaign/Albanese gaffes etc, but after the covid honeymoon year (2020) they were never in a losing position. pic.twitter.com/Fs9Mv5wzap
— Paul Karp (@Paul_Karp) August 6, 2023
Updated
And in case you missed what Andrew Gee said (which is what Jacinta Nampijinpa Price was responding to at the end of that interview there), here is Lorena Allam’s interview with the former Nationals turned independent MP which kicked it all off:
Updated
Price says better education system would ensure young people were not ‘indoctrinated’
The interview closes out with questions about Gee’s criticisms about the Coalition losing young people with its stance.
Jacinta Nampijinpa Price says that Gee should “worry about his own electorate”.
Pushed on the wider issue, Price says that young people have never favoured the Coalition and says:
All I can say, is that the polls are favouring a majority no vote. Some of those might be young people. A majority of them won’t be. But that’s what I’m aiming for – a no vote across the country.
A better education system for our young people so they’re not indoctrinated, either, would be great.
Because then maybe our young people would seek to be better informed when they go to make their vote, whether it’s at an election or at a referendum.
Updated
Jacinta Nampijinpa Price says Andrew Gee’s ‘opinion matters very little to me’
Asked about the criticisms of her former coalition colleague Andrew Gee, Jacinta Nampijinpa Price says:
Mr Gee also said that the party room changed. The only difference that the party room had changed was that there is an Indigenous woman in it since the last time he was in it.
And he doesn’t agree with me, nor did he ever have a conversation with me about the voice before he decided to leave the Nationals party room.
So, you know, his opinion matters very little to me given the opinions of many Indigenous Australians that I’ve spoken to across the country – they’re the ones that matter to me.
Updated
PM should not only listen to Indigenous voices ‘that are saying the things that he wants to hear’: Price
Q: But that’s the point – shouldn’t Peter Dutton have gone up for another reason – to listen to Indigenous voices?
Price:
But he has already done that. I would urge Mr Albanese to listen to the voices that Mr Dutton has listened to. We have called for an inquiry into the sexual abuse of Indigenous children.
But the prime minister has ignored those voices.
They’re the voices that he should be listening to – not the voices that are saying the things that he wants to hear.
But Mr Dutton has listened to those voices and has been to Garma to hear what’s going on.
The Gumatj have been very successful in what they’re doing to create enterprises and support those in communities. They’ve highlighted and done that without a voice to parliament. He’s been there and done that.
Updated
Garma festival a ‘love-in’ and ‘safe ground’ for Albanese, says Price
The interview moves on to whether or not it was a mistake for Peter Dutton to not attend Garma, given it is only a few months out from the referendum.
Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price says Dutton has been to Garma previously. Pushed on whether he should have attended this particular festival given the timing, Price says:
It might be important for some but, for those who can afford to pay almost $3,000 to attend for four days, I mean, it’s a love-in for Labor, for Mr Albanese.
I’d ask Mr Albanese to attend Alice Springs again and spend more time and listen to the vulnerable children in those communities, in the communities in Alice Springs, who would love to have $6 million poured into building accommodation to create a safe haven for them in a learning environment so that they’re not at risk of being abused at night and can get an education.
But, instead, he attends where it’s safe ground for him, where he knows that those around him support him. But he won’t do the hard yards, and won’t listen to Indigenous voices unless they’re enshrined within a constitution, apparently.
Updated
Price labels land councils ‘powerful, multimillion-dollar bureaucracies’
Q: We heard at Garma over the weekend, land councils from the Kimberley to Cape York strongly endorsing the yes vote. That is not insignificant, right?
Jacinta Nampijinpa Price:
Look, there’s plenty of land councils that I’m sure that are very powerful, multimillion-dollar bureaucracies who have been responsible for effectively Closing the Gap, but obviously aren’t doing the job themselves.
They’re supposed to be representing traditional owners.
I have many traditional owners who are very concerned with the way that they don’t feel listened to or represented by land councils.
In fact, on that issue, this week I am putting a motion on the floor of the Senate, and I seek support from across the Senate to hold an inquiry into land councils and other entities around their governance structures, whether they’re being effective in delivering for traditional owners, how they consult traditional owners.
Because I think this is the work that needs to be done, not creating a whole new bureaucracy and putting it in our constitution.
Updated
‘Racial stereotype’ to suggest all Indigenous Australians support voice, Price says
That interview on ABC News Breakfast continues:
Q: Isn’t constitutional recognition exactly what the First Nations’ leaders at the Uluru dialogue called for?
Jacinta Nampijinpa Price:
Again, a handful of Indigenous Australians called for it. Not all Indigenous Australians called for it. And I think it’s a racial stereotype to suggest that all Indigenous Australians support this proposal when there are many, many who don’t, but who often are not heard because, unlike those who attended Uluru, they have never had the opportunity to have a seat at the table to be heard, and had the ear of many prime ministers previously and many governments previously.
But there are a lot more Indigenous Australians out there who don’t feel like they’ve been represented through the Uluru Statement from the Heart.
Unfortunately, we’re the only group of Australians that’s treated this way. No other group of Australians - because of their race - come together to make determinations for the rest of that race of Australians in the country.
And I think we’ve got to move away from that, which is what the Voice is, I guess, symbolic of - that idea that we’re all the same, all think the same, and require a body to represent us based on our heritage as opposed to our needs.
Updated
Legislating voice different from enshrining voice in constitution, says Price
Q: But the Coalition supports legislating a voice. The Coalition also supports constitutional recognition. Where do you differ? Because it strikes me you’re pretty much on the same course here.
Jacinta Nampijinpa Price:
Well, it differs where you create a law, a piece of legislation, that turns out to be ineffective. For example, what’s happened in Western Australia with the Aboriginal Heritage Act. If it’s ineffective or disastrous, you can get rid of it. Unfortunately, there’s also the element of being divided along the lines of race, which is in the constitution, which is something I certainly don’t support, or the idea that we’re forever going to be marginalised and require this mechanism within the constitution as a race of Australians.
Updated
Falling support for voice demonstrates desire for more information: Price
Country Liberal senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price is up on ABC News Breakfast now and is asked if, as one of the leaders of the no campaign, she has been heartened by polls showing support for the voice falling and says:
I think what’s been demonstrated is the fact that Australians are wanting to know more about the voice. When they seek more information, I think they’re finding that they’re not getting the information that they require to make the decision that they’d like to in favour of supporting Indigenous Australians. I think the voice proposal is quite empty and, therefore, this is why support is dropping off for the yes vote.
Updated
‘Cowboys everywhere’ in consulting dealings with government: O’Neill
So given all of that, was Deborah O’Neill surprised by reports (as first revealed by the Guardian’s Henry Belot) that the finance department hired a consultant to advise on its use of consultants?
O’Neill says:
It’s really important when you’re the government that you don’t just jump at shadows. There are expert people within these consultancies who have value to add to the work that government does, [but] they cannot replace an effective public service. And that is part of why the Albanese government committed to making sure that we restore our public service and there will be excellent people who from time to time will come in and support our government in the interest of the nation.
The problem is, we have had cowboys everywhere. That’s the problem.
Updated
So has this government done enough to be able to stop that sort of behaviour?
Deborah O’Neill says:
I think that the government has acted incredibly decisively with this comprehensive response. But it’s also a careful response to what’s been unveiled by what’s happening here in the parliament. It’s the work of the Senate that has documented the reality of what PwC did, and has put on the record the practices that are of great concern amongst these four partnerships.
We haven’t finished our work in the Senate [committee] and we will continue to do that work, but this government has actually undertaken an analysis of what’s going on.
Updated
O’Neill points to previous government’s role in ‘cozy relationship’ with consultants
So how did it all happen? How did consultants manage to have so much leeway within Australia’s public service?
Deborah O’Neill says:
I think what we’ve had is a very cozy relationship and that’s part of the problem – that where the department ended and where the consultancy sector began became so blurred, that there wasn’t sufficient scrutiny.
Let’s be clear for your listeners that this is a practice that was operationalised and absolutely increased in a period of time during the last government – under Mr Morrison, Mr Turnbull and Mr Abbott, they created the context in which this sort of burgeoning business for the biggest for partnerships around this around the world and certainly in this country, were able to actually land and expand into our public service and really have so much more influence than they should ever have had.
Updated
Deborah O’Neill is asked why that is a problem. Isn’t it just good business?
Well, competition is critical to make sure that good business occurs. And when the business is being done by the government, we need to ensure that we are constantly getting value for money and we are not in a situation where our public service has been so hollowed out that people aren’t able to make discerning judgments about what’s right and what’s wrong and what is a good product and what is a poor product, and what is a fair price and what is an inflated price.
Updated
Consultancies working with governments ‘foster’ and ‘reward conflicts of interest’: senator Deborah O’Neill
The actions of consultants continues to dominate the political agenda. Labor senator Deborah O’Neill spoke to ABC radio RN Breakfast this morning about the “land and expand” model. That comes ahead of a Four Corners report into consultants:
I’ll let O’Neill explain:
That is not just happening here in Australia, but actually happening around the world – where consultancies, huge consultancies find a path into government. They get themselves embedded, they strategically build and maintain relationships, and then they start to not avoid conflicts of interest, but actually foster conflicts of interest, reward conflicts of interest, by finding out about what’s happening in different parts of the department, and then getting ahead of the curve and bidding for that kind of work.
Updated
‘We have to complete reconciliation in our country’: Andrew Gee
Andrew Gee says he thinks that people haven’t turned their minds to the voice as yet because they are focused on their own lives. But he says he remains confident that it will get across the line, despite the polling showing falling support.
Australia was, is, the land of the fair go, and I think when people actually focus on this issue, they’ll think about what’s fair and the fact that this great story of Australia that we are so proud of is not complete and it will not be complete until everybody is a part of the story.
The story of European settlement is part of the story. But it’s that story that goes back tens of thousands of years … I think those two stories really need to come together as we’ve heard over the weekend [at Garma] so that we can move forward as a united country.
But until this issue is resolved, reconciliation won’t be complete.
We have to complete reconciliation in our country and I hope it’s complete in my lifetime.
Updated
Andrew Gee says he has put the National party “behind him”.
I’ll look up, I’ve put them in the rearview mirror. I’m not looking back, and I’m dropping the hammer down and going and we’re gonna get this voice over the line.
Updated
Liberal party will alienate ‘a huge cross-section of people’ if voice no campaign is successful: Gee
Andrew Gee finished his thought with this:
To me, and politically, it doesn’t make sense. If the voice does not succeed – and I think the voice will succeed, I think we will get it over the line – but if it does not, there will be a real emptiness about what has happened.
And there’ll be a sense of mourning across large sections of the community and they will, the Liberal party, for example, will find that they have alienated a huge cross-section of people that traditionally would support them.
I mean, I don’t get it.
I mean politically, leave aside all of the emotion of it, but politically, I just don’t get it.
I think it’s a very short-sighted attitude to take. And I think longer term, when the history books are written, history will judge them very poorly for it.
Updated
Voice being weaponised politically and to help ‘raise funds’: Andrew Gee
Andrew Gee had more to say about that:
I think that at the moment the voice is being weaponised politically for a number of reasons, and obviously, it helps raise funds and I know this because I’m still getting the emails saying, ‘the voice is terrible, please give some money’.
They’re doing it I think to shore up leadership positions. I think they’re doing it to just have some ground to fight on. But ultimately, I think, the hope that this is the pathway to victory is a bankrupt hope.
They lost Aston when they were still doubling down on the voice – how could the [takeaway from] the Aston byelection in Victoria possibly be that we have to go harder in trying to take down the voice?
Updated
Coalition campaign to ‘take down’ voice will be a ‘hollow victory’ if successful: Andrew Gee
Former Nationals MP Andrew Gee, who quit the party over its no stance on the referendum, says the Coalition’s position to oppose the referendum is “a road to ruin”.
(You can read more about that here in his interview from Garma with Lorena Allam)
The now independent MP expanded on that to RN Breakfast radio host Patricia Karvelas:
Because at the end of the day, politics is a brutal game of arithmetic. And let’s just say that, that campaign to take down the voice which is what it is, at the moment, let’s just say it succeeds.
As the election draws closer, the hotheads on that side of politics are going to they actually going to say, well, how are we going to win back these seats? Where is the path to victory here?
Yet having reached that point, they will then realise that they’ve just burned large swathes of their supportive bias because there are lots of people on the conservative side of politics who actually support the voice.
So if that campaign to take the voice down succeeds, it will be a hollow victory and to borrow from JFK, a victory like that will ultimately be ashes in their mouths, because they’re not going to get those seats on the Northern Beaches back so they’re not going to get Indi back, they’re not going to get Rebekha Sharkie’s seat back, they’re not going to get Wentworth back. So what actually is the path to victory?
Updated
‘I have no doubt we’ll remain resilient’, McCarthy says on question of future attempts if voice referendum fails
Malarndirri McCarthy was asked again about the prospect of the referendum failing, and the prime minister’s declaration that if the referendum failed, that would be it and said:
I will say this to you, as a First Nations woman, we had disappointments throughout our entire history. Whether we fought for all sorts of rights, and sometimes we have won and sometimes we have lost, but we have remained resilient. In this instance I have no doubt that we’ll remain resilient.
Updated
McCarthy ‘optimistic’ voice would be operating in this term of government if referendum succeeds
So no voice, no treaty, is what you’re saying? Malarndirri McCarthy is asked.
Not at all. I’m saying that we have to stay focused on the first item of the Uluru statement from the heart and that is a voice.
Q: We had Noel Pearson, with one of the most prominent voices, saying if the voice did get up, it could be operating within this term of government. Is he correct?
McCarthy:
I’m pretty optimistic. If we are successful in this referendum, I would like to see moves here in this parliament, that again we continue to reach out to all parliamentarians to be involved in what would be, if we are successful, an extraordinary time in our country’s history going forward.
Q: If the voice goes down, just confirming what the prime minister said on Insiders yesterday, that will be it? No second attempt by the government to even legislate a voice to parliament?
McCarthy:
I’m staying focused on the grand final. I believe that’s where we should be focused.
Updated
McCarthy labels actions of voice opponents ‘quite disingenuous’
Has Anthony Albanese added to the confusion for the yes campaign, given the contradictory statements around treaty?
Malarndirri McCarthy says:
The prime minister sat down with leaders and reaffirmed our commitment to voice, treaty, truth, what we always said in terms of the Uluru Statement from the Heart.
What our opponents have been throwing at us has been quite disingenuous. Unless we win the referendum, it’s very difficult to move to those second components and third components. It’s like planning for a grand final. We have to prepare for the referendum and we need to win it, and hopefully win it convincingly.
Updated
‘We have so much hope and belief’ in referendum: Malarndirri McCarthy
NT Labor senator Malarndirri McCarthy spoke to ABC Breakfast TV this morning and was asked if she was worried about the yes campaign failing and said:
Not at all … We know, and we knew from the very beginning that referendums are so hard to win in this country. We’ve seen it with the statistics of only eight out of 44. We now don’t have bipartisan support, we’re having everything thrown at us.
But we have so much hope and belief and faith we’ll get through to the other side. The goodness of Gulkula and the spirit of the people that flowed through that country to all of us is reaching out to right across Australia and I will not stop in believing that, right up until 6pm on the night of the referendum.
Updated
Anthony Albanese is kicking off his Monday with a bunch of radio interviews. ABC Brisbane is on the list, along with Sydney radio 2DayFM, where he will no doubt promise the hosts a private tour of the Canberra catacombs, before dinner on top of the parliament flagpole, given his penchant for giving up his spare time to FM radio hosts for weddings, dinners and DJ-ing.
Overhaul of NSW homelessness services needed to ease ‘gridlock’, report says
Homelessness services in New South Wales require a significant overhaul to ease a “gridlock” that means they are unable to keep up with demand and the social housing waitlist is blowing out, a new report has found.
Homelessness NSW has canvassed the views of more than 650 people and 200 organisations across the state government, service providers, people with lived experience and the finance and property sectors on what needs to change over the next 10 years.
More than 57,000 households are on the waiting list for social housing, with many of them waiting for more than a decades for a permanent home, the peak body says.
Higher welfare payments, the upgrading and maintenance of social housing, and adequate support to stop people from becoming homeless after leaving prison, hospital or out-of-home care are among the priorities identified by the report.
The Homelessness NSW acting chief executive, Amy Hains, said more people than ever before were experiencing homelessness in NSW, in part because of a “long-term failure to invest in adequate social and affordable housing”. Hains said:
When people can access support for homelessness, it’s often short-term.
Homelessness services, which support more than 60,000 people each year, are also overwhelmed and underfunded, meaning that nearly half the people who are seeking help do not receive it.
The report will be launched in Sydney on Monday morning. The state’s housing and homelessness minister, Rose Jackson, will give a speech at the event.
Updated
Yes campaign boosts efforts in Queensland
Indigenous voice architect Prof Megan Davis says the yes campaign and the Uluru dialogue is looking to make “serious” inroads in Queensland during the referendum, as her group boosts efforts in a state seen by many as tough ground for voice supporters.
The Uluru dialogue was joined by the treasurer, Jim Chalmers, for a grassroots community event in his electorate of Logan on Sunday. Davis said more would come.
“Having treasurer Jim Chalmers with us here in Logan shows how serious we are in making sure grassroots conversations happen in Queensland,” she said.
“This was a grassroots event held at Gunya-Meta in Logan and is a reflection of the work we will be doing as the Uluru dialogue. It is through dialogue with Aussies face-to-face we will win this referendum.”
Signatories of the Uluru statement from the heart are boosting campaign work in south-east Queensland, with local community events and conversations about the voice. Queensland has been seen by some as one of the states more likely to oppose the referendum, but the increasingly progressive area around Brisbane is expected to be more fruitful for the yes campaign.
Davis said the Uluru dialogue, the architect of the Uluru statement from the heart, would continue highlighting the document’s history and its genesis in the consultations with Indigenous people over several years.
“Helping Queenslanders understand the history behind the voice was what we set out to do and we achieved that with the group who travelled here today,” she said.
“The voice has a history of its own. It wasn’t called for overnight, and it is something First Peoples support. The Uluru statement was issued to the Australian people to walk with us in a people’s movement. We can’t lose this in the conversation over these next few months.”
Updated
Good morning
Welcome to the second sitting week of parliament – it is almost as if the winter break never happened.
The Garma festival continued on Sunday with Labor and yes campaigners reinvigorated for the referendum campaign. Prior to the event, there had been speculation that Anthony Albanese was going to announce the date of the referendum at Garma, given that the previous year he had announced the wording of the referendum.
Ahead of the festival, amid falling poll support, Albanese said he wouldn’t be announcing the date, and that when he did, it would be shortly before the referendum was held.
So the focus of the festival was on the campaign.
Prof Megan Davis said it would be grassroots which would win the yes campaign, and that “serous inroads” were being made in Queensland, which is one of the states the no campaign is hitting hard.
So if you are in Queensland or Western Australia, you can expect to see a bit more from the yes campaign in the coming weeks.
Closer to Canberra and the fallout from the ACT prosecutions board of inquiry continues.
And there is also the whole parliament sitting week ahead of us, which means a whole bunch of mess is about to begin.
You have Amy Remeikis with you on the blog for most of the day, with Paul Karp, Daniel Hurst, Josh Butler and Sarah Basford Canales in Canberra, plus the rest of the Guardian Australia brains trust. It is good to be back with you.
Ready?
Let’s get into it.
