Get all your news in one place.

100’s of premium titles.
One app.

Start reading

Get all your news in one place.

100’s of premium titles. One news app.

Start reading

The Guardian - AU

National

Stephanie Convery, Tory Shepherd and Amy Remeikis (earlier)

Government’s legacy ‘a toxic miasma of division’, Ryan says – as it happened

Scott Morrison Penny Wong

Monique Ryan and Josh Frydenberg — Independent candidate Monique Ryan debates federal treasurer Josh Frydenberg on day 25 of the 2022 federal election campaign as they battle for the seat of Kooyong.
Photograph: Andrew Henshaw/AAP

9.49am BST

And that’s a wrap on this blog for today. Stick around on the site this evening though, as we’re expecting Labor leader Anthony Albanese to give a solo appearance on the ABC’s Q&A later tonight, and we’ll bring you all the details and analysis.

Earlier today, Albanese visited a clean energy expo to inspect electric cars and solar panels, and later gave a speech to the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. He also spoke at a press conference about the NDIS, at one point being berated by reporters when he appeared to need to refer to documentation to answer a question from a reporter about the party’s policy in this area.

Prime minister Scott Morrison was hit with more heat over the Solomon Islands-China agreement, getting repeated questions on the matter at press conferences, during which he denied he had inflamed the situation but refused to say exactly when he last spoke to Solomon Islands prime minister Manasseh Sogavare. The latter, meanwhile, blasted the “lack of trust” and “tacit warning of military intervention” by neighbours over the China pact – not directly referring to Australia but the implication was clear.

Peter Dutton and Brendan O’Connor debated all matters defence at the National Press Club, with Dutton calling the Guardian “a trashy publication” after Guardian political reporter Daniel Hurst asked a question about the implementation of the Brereton reforms.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg, meanwhile, debated his teal independent opponent Monique Ryan for the seat of Kooyong on matters including climate crisis, job keeper payments, refugee policy, China, gender equity and more. Ryan said the legacy of the federal government will be a “toxic miasma of division, disappointment and debt”. Frydenberg argued Australia has “very big issues” including climate change, the pandemic and an unstable region and said he still had “a lot of work still to do.”

And Australia has today recorded at least 56 deaths from Covid-19, with case numbers nationally reaching over 54,000 in the last reporting period.

Thanks for sticking with us! Politics Live pros Amy Remeikis and Tory Shepherd will be back with you tomorrow.

Updated at 10.00am BST

9.36am BST

⚠️Minor #Flood Warning current for #Huon River from Friday morning. Moderate-Major flooding possible if heavy rainfall is widespread overnight. The #BOM is monitoring the situation closely. See https://t.co/V9LYfDAYDq for updates; follow advice from @SESTasmania. #TasFloods pic.twitter.com/3JUUC4BYjW
— Bureau of Meteorology, Tasmania (@BOM_Tas) May 5, 2022

9.25am BST

One of the most striking statements on climate change during the election campaign has come from an unlikely source – the owner of the country’s most power-hungry industrial plant.

Tomago Aluminium, near Newcastle, consumes about 11% of all power generation in New South Wales. For years, its management has warned about the economic impact of policies to cut Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions.

In the past, Tomago’s chief executive, Matt Howell, argued that a shift away from coal would push up prices and could lead to blackouts and the closure of the smelter. His argument that Australia would stop “making things” if it did not have baseload fossil fuel power was published on the front of the Daily Telegraph and praised by right-wing commentators including Peta Credlin and Ray Hadley.

But times, and opinions, change. This week, Howell issued what was effectively a challenge to Australia’s biggest emitter, AGL Energy, to embrace renewable energy much more rapidly, and declared that Tomago was prepared to give up coal-fired power by the end of the decade.

'Toxic miasma of division': Monique Ryan on Morrison government's legacy

It’s now the closing statements for the treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, and the independent candidate Monique Ryan in this Kooyong debate.

Ryan says the legacy of the federal government will be a “toxic miasma of division, disappointment and debt”. “We need to do better,” she says. “This government has done nothing good for us in the past nine years.”

“Politics for me is about people,” Frydenberg responds, giving an NDIS case study. “It’s about small business (another case study). “It’s about my local community.”

He says Australia has “very big issues” including climate change, the pandemic and an unstable region. “I have a lot of work still to do,” he says.

Josh Frydenberg and Kooyong independent Monique Ryan during the televised debate at Hawthorn Town Hall in Melbourne. Photograph: Andrew Henshaw/AAP

Updated at 6.41am BST

5.57am BST

The next question is about federal-state relations in the pandemic. Josh Frydenberg has a crack at the Victorian premier, Daniel Andrews, for Covid restrictions, adding: “And yet, it was the federal government that was picking up the bill.”

National cabinet tried to find common ground, he says, but the states had a lot of the power.

The states stepped up “because there was a leadership vacuum at a federal level”, Monique Ryan says.

Updated at 6.00am BST

5.55am BST

And now, it’s getting quite personal. Josh Frydenberg is repeating his story that Monique Ryan’s mother-in-law told him she would vote for him. You can read that story here.

“She feels she was misquoted by him,” Ryan says:

My mother-in-law has been subjected to some harassing and distressing phone calls and responses. She’s found it really difficult.

Ryan says families should be left out of politicking, and that she signed a pledge about integrity in the campaign, and then Frydenberg says her letterboxing materials attacking him do not show integrity.

Updated at 5.59am BST

5.52am BST

On a policy for nuclear weapons (I think the questioner was in favour), Monique Ryan says she’s in favour of federal legislation against nuclear weapons.

Josh Frydenberg is also not in favour (it would be a big story if he was).

Updated at 5.57am BST

5.51am BST

We’ve gone from integrity to public hospitals. Monique Ryan says Frydenberg as the “treasurer for NSW” wouldn’t know about hospitals in Victoria.

I won’t be insulted like that, Josh Frydenberg says:

I’m the member for Kooyong, I’m the treasurer of Australia, and I have delivered economic support for Victoria, which is greater than any other state on a per capita basis.

Updated at 5.57am BST

5.48am BST

On a federal integrity commission, Josh Frydenberg says the government’s exposure draft has powers that are “greater than a royal commission”. (An RMIT/ABC factcheck found that claim was “overblown”).

A commission like that proposed by the independent MP Helen Haines allows public referrals, he says, and that would “weaponise” the process, “probably quicker than you can say Jack Robinson”.

Updated at 5.51am BST

5.44am BST

The next question is on gender equity. Monique Ryan says the gender gap is “real and significant”:

The first thing for me is an absolute no-brainer, it’s that women should receive superannuation appended to maternity leave.

Josh Frydenberg runs through planned superannuation changes so that women being paid less than $450 a month will get superannuation, and improvements to transparency and accountability in super.

Updated at 5.47am BST

5.42am BST

Frydenberg and Ryan are talking about the fine line between speaking candidly about China and being a trade partner.

Monique Ryan says the relationship has been “handled badly” with “macho breast-beating belligerence”.

Josh Frydenberg says the government’s issue is with “China’s more assertive behaviour”, and highlights the tariffs China has put on Australian goods, and China’s dislike of criticism.

Updated at 5.46am BST

5.36am BST

Q: Why would a hung parliament be a bad thing?

Monique Ryan says we’ve had a minority government for a long time – because the Liberal party is only in power because of its coalition with the Nationals.

With the Coalition in power, it’s been independents taking legislation on issues including climate change and a federal integrity bill to parliament.

The Sky News host Kieran Gilbert asks Frydenberg about the initial question, and why his billboards say “Save Josh”, and whether that means his colleagues are a drag on his vote.

Josh Frydenberg decides to answer a different question, and is talking about the “uncertainty” of a hung parliament. He says:

On the big issues of economic security and national security, we need the stability of government.

He points to the instability in Italy with turnovers of government (!). Then Gilbert asks him again about the billboards. He says:

If people want to vote for me ... if they want to keep me as the local member, but they may have an issue with something that the Liberal party has said or done – and they may want to give us a kick for that – at the end of the day ... that may not leave me as the local member, which is of course not what I want.

Josh Frydenberg and Monique Ryan during the televised Kooyong debate in Melbourne. Photograph: Andrew Henshaw/AAP

Updated at 6.44am BST

5.31am BST

The next question is on refugees, and people who need “somewhere safe to live”.

Josh Frydenberg says the government has a very strong humanitarian intake and has extended that for people fleeing Afghanistan and Ukraine.

Then he says:

At the same time, we’ve had a strong border protection policy.

His government has removed children from detention, he says, before telling a story about his mother arriving, stateless, in Australia.

Monique Ryan says Australia’s attitude towards refugees has been “a shame”. If she had the power, she would end offshore detention, increase the humanitarian intake, and end temporary protection visas:

People who come to this country should be treated with compassion.

Updated at 5.35am BST

5.27am BST

Monique Ryan is explaining why she – as an independent – doesn’t have costings for climate change. That’s because she will support Warringah independent Zali Steggall’s bill.

Imagine the poor people at the parliamentary budget office if they had to fully cost every candidate’s every move.

Josh Frydenberg and independent candidate Monique Ryan at the Kooyong debate. Photograph: Andrew Henshaw/AAP

Updated at 6.49am BST

5.25am BST

Josh Frydenberg and Monique Ryan are having a barney over jobkeeper, and the amount given to profitable companies. Ryan says $38bn went to companies that didn’t need it. Frydenberg says that’s not true, because most recipients were small businesses or not-for-profits. (That may be technically true, but doesn’t debunk that $38bn figure.)

Updated at 5.40am BST

5.22am BST

You’re both highly skilled professionals, a voter says. Isn’t the country better off if you keep your current jobs? The crowd chortles.

Josh Frydenberg uses that to kick off a speech about Australia’s economy and the “700,000 jobs we saved with jobkeeper”. But it’s not about the numbers, he says (after reeling off some more numbers), it’s about the people behind the numbers.

Monique Ryan disagrees that Australia has a strong economy right now, and says she loved her job and was good at it, but that as a scientist who has seen the science on climate change – “the existential threat for us right now” – had to take action. The major parties aren’t, she says, which is why independents are stepping up:

We have to put up our hand and do this. We have to make a difference.

Rampant inflation and stagnating wages show the economy isn’t strong, she says.

Updated at 5.37am BST

5.17am BST

“I don’t agree that Frydenberg is a moderate Liberal,” Monique Ryan says, in answer to a question.

He sits with prime minister Scott Morrison, she says. “We are defined by our actions, not our words. Frydenberg … has never crossed the floor on a matter of conscience.”

Josh Frydenberg says he joined the Liberal party because of its values. “I am who I am,” he says, then accuses Ryan of concealing her political background.

“She sought to conceal the fact she was a member of the Labor party,” he says.

(Ryan has even put on her website that she briefly joined the Labor party when former prime minister Kevin Rudd said he’d ratify the Kyoto agreement.)

Updated at 5.38am BST

5.14am BST

Monique Ryan is talking about electric vehicle batteries, and the need to make them in Australia.

Josh Frydenberg is on the same page, talking about the need to refine rare minerals for batteries. He says the government has done its bit to encourage the uptake of EVs, including committing to charging stations, subsidies via the luxury car tax, etc.

Updated at 5.39am BST

5.13am BST

National Covid summary

Here are the latest coronavirus numbers from around Australia today, as the country records at least 56 deaths from Covid-19:

ACT

Deaths: 0
Cases: 1,085
In hospital: 70 (with 4 people in ICU)

NSW

Deaths: 21
Cases: 18,529
In hospital: 1,529 (with 62 people in ICU)

Northern Territory

Deaths: 0
Cases: 451
In hospital: 38 (with 1 person in ICU)

Queensland

Deaths: 11
Cases: 8,045
In hospital: 467 (with 14 people in ICU)

South Australia

Deaths: 4
Cases: 3,894
In hospital: 218 (with 11 people in ICU)

Tasmania

Deaths: 0
Cases: 1,086
In hospital: 46 (with 3 people in ICU)

Victoria

Deaths: 14
Cases: 11,596
In hospital: 492 (with 29 people in ICU)

Western Australia

Deaths: 6
Cases: 10,182
In hospital: 271 (with 9 people in ICU)

5.10am BST

Josh Frydenberg debates Kooyong independent Monique Ryan

Good afternoon! And goodness me, Amy Remeikis, what a whirlwind.

And it continues – the treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, is debating his contender in Kooyong, independent Monique Ryan.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg and Kooyong independent Monique Ryan shake hands at their televised debate — Treasurer Josh Frydenberg and Kooyong independent candidate Monique Ryan shake hands at their televised debate at Hawthorn Town Hall in Melbourne. Photograph: Andrew Henshaw/AAP

Updated at 6.46am BST

5.07am BST

Tory Shepherd will take you through the afternoon and we will have coverage of Anthony Albanese’s solo appearance on Q+A tonight as well, so I hope you’ll stick around.

I’ll be back early tomorrow morning – until then, take care of you Ax

Updated at 5.43am BST

5.05am BST

Because you’ll be seeing a lot of it, here is Anthony Albanese being questioned on Labor’s NDIS six-point plan.

Updated at 5.44am BST

4.52am BST

Daniel Hurst can’t table things at the National Press Club – no one can, as it is not parliament.

But this is what he was referring to:

This is the CDF/Secretary submission to Dutton that I quoted from at #NPC . It’s now up on the Defence FOI disclosure log, but credit to Anthony Galloway of @smh @theage for first getting those docs: https://t.co/AxZZ9vvBOs
— Daniel Hurst (@danielhurstbne) May 5, 2022

Here you can see his original reporting on that particular doc: https://t.co/FeOi5wiGVD
— Daniel Hurst (@danielhurstbne) May 5, 2022

Updated at 5.06am BST

4.43am BST

The debate ends.

(Thank you to those who pointed out we had the wrong photo – that is fixed. I had my head in the debate and didn’t notice, so apologies and thanks for letting me know.)

Updated at 4.49am BST

4.39am BST

Peter Dutton closes:

On May 21 when Australians walk into the polling booth, they will be faced with a choice. Our country is grappling with security challenges of scale and complexity that we’ve not experienced since the second world war.

Australians have a choice about who will lead our country through a dangerous and uncertain time.

It’s a choice between an experienced Morrison government that has invested in our security, has made tough decisions and has a track record of keeping us safe and our country safe.

Or the alternative? A Labor party with a weak leader and a track record of failing to properly fund our defence force.

... Under the Coalition, defence spending has increased by 60%. Navy spending is up by 76%. Army up by 49%, and air force by 132%.

Under Labor, defence spending was cut and it was cut and it was cut further.

They delayed or cancelled or cut 160 projects. The truth is that Labor can’t manage the economy and they can’t manage national security. They did it in the defence force just like they did it in our national security and law enforcement agencies.

Our country, at this time, cannot afford Labor at the next election.

Updated at 4.51am BST

4.38am BST

Each gets a minute to wrap up.

Brendan O’Connor goes first:

This is a very important debate and it’s a very important time for the Australian people to make a decision about who is best equipped to defend this nation. Who is likely to engage? Not just ... investment in defence – and to that extent we agree with the government. But who is going to employ diplomacy? Who is going to invest within the region and internationally?

Who is going to make sure that we are engaging fully, sincerely, with our neighbours. They’re not just our neighbours, as I said before, they’re our friends.

Which government really believes in investing and enhancing local defence industry to manufacture defence assets here?

I would say in answer to that question, a Labor government is more likely to be engaged in diplomacy as well as investing in defence. So the Labor government that is more likely to be investing in defence local industry, making sure that we have enforceable provisions to allow for local content in those very large contracts. I think that the government has dropped the ball.

They’ve been derelict regardless of what is said by Peter and it’s time for an Albanese Labor government.

The ‘very important’ national press club debate between Brendan O’Connor and Peter Dutton. Photograph: ABC TV

Updated at 4.54am BST

4.36am BST

Brendan O’Connor:

I think that is fair to say that Scott Morrison should have put in more effort, put in a phone call to the prime minister of Solomon Islands. He should explain to the Australian people what “red line” means. And that’s why you might be getting a response from the Solomon Islands after the rhetorical red line reference was never explained.

I saw the briefing from the government as to whether something has changed so significantly as to allow the prime minister to invoke that phrase. But I don’t suppose that there is. I think it is just a rhetorical flourish. But it’s really that lack of engagement. The fact that the foreign minister wasn’t in a position to visit. It’s been a long time since a senior ministerial visit to the Solomon Islands and I think that we’ve dropped the ball, frankly.

Updated at 5.30am BST

4.35am BST

Dutton says 'there's a trendy pile-on' on Morrison but PM believes in Pacific family

Q: My question is to Minister Dutton. You said just before that the Solomon Islands prime minister has not said a word of criticism for Mr Morrison. But yesterday, Manasseh Sogavare said his government is being treated like kindergarten students with guns in need of supervision. Clearly he’s angry. What will your government do to improve relations?

Peter Dutton:

A couple of points. Firstly, I don’t believe that those criticisms were directed towards Australia, because the relationship that we have with the Solomon Islands is an incredibly important one, and it will continue to be so.

I know that there’s a trendy pile-on of Scott Morrison in different parts of the media and around the country at the moment. But Scott has gone out of his way to form those personal relationships at different fora through bilateral discussions, and he genuinely believes in the family of the Pacific.

And I heard him relay conversations that he’s had with different Pacific Island leaders in national security committee (NSC) discussions.

So I can understand the pressure that prime minister Manasseh Sogavare is under at the moment, but in Australia, as he said, he finds a good friend.

He finds somebody that is reliable. He’s not suggesting that we can’t provide support to the Solomon Islands. We’ve got ADF and Australian federal police on the ground in the Solomon Islands now. And that will continue to be the case.

We haven’t withdrawn effort. We haven’t been asked to withdraw.

We were requested to go there. And the NSC took a decision that we would do exactly that, because we wanted to help a friend.

But China operates by very different rules. And if you want to pretend that this is a problem of Australia, well, pretend it’s a problem of Japan in the East China Sea, and pretend it’s a problem for India on the land border where the Indian troops have been killed.

And pretend that it’s a problem of the Philippines that are at odds with the Chinese government at the moment. And pretend that it’s a problem of Vietnam where their waters are being fished out.

I mean, this is an issue worldwide. Talk to the Sri Lankans where the port has just been taken back because they can’t meet the debt repayments to the Chinese government. We’re living with that reality. And you can dance around the different half sentences and nuance here and the nuance there. Our country faces a very uncertain time and now is not a time to risk a change of government to a weak government at the next election.

Solomon Islands prime minister Manasseh Sogavare. Photograph: Mark Schiefelbein/AP

Updated at 5.28am BST

4.34am BST

Brendan O’Connor responds:

I think it is fair to say to not comment on certain matters there and we support the Office of the Special Investigator. I do think, though, and it was before Peter’s time. He’s only been in the job for just over 10% of the government’s term in defence. And he’s number six.

But in fact, when Linda Reynolds was defence minister, I think it was unfortunate that she chose not to appear with the CDF when the Brereton report was publicised. I remember being on Insiders about to be interviewed by David Speers and I couldn’t believe it, but there was the CDF taking the guest appearance instead of a minister, instead of Minister Reynolds.

It shows that the government is willing to walk away from political leadership on that issue and they should not have. I’m not saying that that has happened with Peter, but I do say that it did happen at the time of the Brereton report was published publicly.

And I do think that the government should have stood next to the chief of defence force and answered the questions about that matter. Otherwise, to the extent that Peter answered that we can’t talk about the matters until there’s a proper investigation under way, I accept that proposition.

Former defence minister Linda Reynolds, who is now minister for government services and the NDIS. Photograph: Lukas Coch/AAP

Updated at 5.26am BST

4.32am BST

Guardian Australia asks Dutton about the Brereton inquiry reforms

Guardian Australia’s Daniel Hurst asks this question:

To a substantial matter within your portfolio – the implementation of the Brereton inquiry reforms. The chief of the defence force, General [Angus] Campbell, has said that transparency would be key to this process – and your predecessor, Linda Reynolds, said she would regularly update parliament on how Defence was going with this and yet you haven’t once mentioned it in parliament. You approved the Afghanistan inquiry reform plan on 26 May last year, but it wasn’t released for more than two months and was just quietly placed on a Defence website on a Friday.

And FOI documents have shown that the CDF warned you that retaining the meritorious unit citation “poses unacceptable risks to the moral authority of the force and threatens the international and domestic reputation of the ADF and its capacity to operate effectively. The action could be perceived by international counterparts as dismissive and a failure to accept accountability.”

Minister, why have you hung the CDF out to dry? And why have you failed to keep the public informed of theses important reforms via parliament?

Peter Dutton:

Daniel from the Guardian – one of my favourite publications I might say.

Hurst:

I’m glad you read it.

Dutton:

I’m being sarcastic, of course.

Hurst:

To the substance, it’s an important matter.

Dutton:

You’ve asked your question and I’ll answer it. I have found – and I’ve known Angus for many years.

I’ve found him to be an incredibly effective leader. A person with great capability. An affable person. Somebody who provides inspiration to many that he’s led over a long period of time.

So don’t dare say that I have undermined him as the chief of the defence force. I never have and I never would. So I take that very seriously. And if you have a suggestion that you’d like to substantiate your comment with, as to something I’ve said, then you should table it here, today.

And, of course, you can’t.

Hurst:

It’s the FOI.

Dutton:

I’ll answer your question. We have a situation where as home affairs minister, in response to serious allegations, along with the attorney general of the day, we set up the Office of the Special Investigator. We did that on advice from the Australian federal police commissioner, on advice from the CDF and from others, and we looked at all of the advice and we took a decision to set up the OSI.

Now that has at its head an eminent legally qualified former judge. It has an investigative capacity. It’s doing its work and so we have moved into a different phase. I’m not commenting on investigations.

I’m not commenting on whether a particular investigation is up to a certain stage. Whether somebody is about to be arrested. Whether somebody has just been cleared.

These are proper investigations that are undertaken by the OSI. So it’s not a play thing. It’s not something that should be disregarded. I have the utmost respect for the men and women of the Australian Defence Force, including those within the SAS.

I’m not going to hang people out to dry, but if people have done the wrong thing, then there’s a process to answer to. But we are following proper process here.

There’s not going to be a situation where leaking information about a particular individual in your publication, or any trashy publication like it. We are not going to do that. We are going to allow the police to investigate the matters and if there’s sufficient evidence to prosecute, then they will prosecute.

Updated at 6.00am BST

4.29am BST

Q: A question for both of you. The defence department last year was warned by ASPI its spending on contractors is a “looming iceberg” that could eat into the acquisition budget. Both the numbers of contractors and the external workforce have grown by thousands over the last two to three years. How will you respond to those warnings that this spending could sap the acquisition budget if you win the election?

Brendan O’Connor:

We’ve already got a broader policy to examine the use of consultants and contractors to see whether they’re efficient.

We know that there’s been a terrible depletion in the department of veterans’ affairs of moving dedicated public servants and putting in place untrained and often unskilled, not always sensitive, labour hire employees to try to do a job that they’re not particularly made for.

We’ve got concerns, to be honest, across government about the overuse of some of these consultancies, and as I think that Jim Chalmers made clear and Katy Gallagher, that we would be examining the value for money.

We’ve already made a committee insofar as the Department of Veterans’ Affairs is concerned, is to rededicate $250m to renovate that department because it’s in a terrible way. It’s got 60,000 veterans waiting for their matters, their applications to be properly sorted. We need to do better and that’s a very good example of what’s happened under this government’s watch, I believe.

Peter Dutton:

A couple of points. Firstly, it’s obvious when you take money from defence over forward estimates or into the years that it’s very hard to plan because you’ve got a recurrent cost with wages, and under Labor spending $10bn a year less it does mean that you need to trim numbers. And that’s the impact.

It provides great uncertainty for the workforce, for the forward projections about how programs are going to be delivered, and the like. And as I pointed out before, we have put ourselves in a position where we’ve corrected Labor deprioritising defence, taking money out of the ADF and not only have we stabilised, but we’ve increased the spending.

And over the forward estimates we go beyond 2%. And we grow to next year $48bn a year. And by $3bn or so each year from there. And as I said before, my judgment is that we will need to commit more to defence into the future as well.

I suspect your argument, as a journalist from the Canberra Times, is not that there should be less jobs in Canberra ... If Labor were to win it would only be in concert with the minor parties, including the Greens, [like] when Labor was last in power. And the Greens have a definite policy to cut billions of dollars from defence, which would mean thousands of jobs from defence and from defence industry being lost, including in places like Canberra. And Zed and his colleagues here are standing firmly against that. And thank goodness for it.

And we should point out that difference. And I think that it is the uncertainty that Labor brings if they’re elected on May 21. Not just to the department and to people wearing the uniform, but also to the hundred thousand people that now work within defence industry across the country.

Updated at 5.24am BST

4.27am BST

Q: The question is mainly for Minister Dutton but I’ll be interested in your views on diminishing transparency around defence decision-making. Why is it that the people of Australia have to learn about things like the cancelled armed UK AV contract and cancelled Australian build of the large Pacific support vessel through bureaucrats being grilled during Senate estimates rather than from the minister responsible?

Peter Dutton:

I’ve been very clear to the defence force, to the secretary of my department, to the chief of the defence force and the service chiefs.

I’ve been very clear to the Australian people that where we have programs that are not performing, those programs will be terminated.

And I’ve been clear with our industry partners that we value the partnership very much, but we expect in a contracted arrangement for there to be performance ...

Now, in the vast majority of cases, we have a successful outcome and the defence department, along with our industry partners, are able to deliver capability on time, on budget and enhance the capacity to defend our country.

So I don’t want the problem projects to overshadow the successes that we have, and evidenced by what we’ve been able to acquire just over the last couple of years. We have the ability to make announcements, whether it is by the release from me or advice to the department, first in a situation where there’s been a decision that’s been leaked and the media has picked it up, or the opposition has received that through a disaffected party and that’s put to an official within Senate estimates before we’re able to make or we’re prepared to make a public announcement. I can’t change that.

I mean, that’s the nature of your business is to try to form relationships with people that will pass you a document or give you a heads-up on something. So I don’t want to do the journalists out of business, but that’s the reality of it.

But all I would say is that we are spending $270bn this decade and we need to spend more. And if you look at some of the projects, Loyal Wingman is a project where that has the potential to be a $1bn a year export. It’s going to be a huge success story, I believe, for Boeing and the partnership we have there. It’s a necessary capability. It’s going to support us and our allies and it’s a huge achievement and I think that we should be proud of it.

Brendan O’Connor:

Clearly there should be transparency. You don’t get to boast about the Redspice while you cancel secretly the Sky Guardian. You shouldn’t be able to boast about building a support vessel and meanwhile buy a secondhand one and hide it in the Canary Islands.

The government has to be more accountable and transparent in this ... There’s a litany of examples where the government has not done what it said it would do, and often promoted things that are new but never mention the things that it’s cancelled. Remember, this government started with a defence minister who is famous for saying, “We can’t build a canoe.” So you wonder whether they actually support sovereign capability.

Updated at 5.12am BST

4.24am BST

Peter Dutton:

The last time that you sat around the National Security Committee table, you were responsible for the arrival of some 12,000 people and 184 boats. What do you say to the men and women of the Australian navy who are still suffering from PTSD today from having pulled those bodies from the water of those women and children who drowned at sea?

Brendan O’Connor:

Well, I firstly obviously have enormous admiration for the customs and naval personnel who rescued people at sea, who were going to dangerous situations in high sea stakes.

And I can remember vividly in 2010 when I flew into Christmas Island on the day that that unseaworthy vessel floundered on the rocks of Christmas Island. Our crew went in to tenders and ribs, plucked, retrieved and rescued people out of the water. I was involved with the administrator having to set up a temporary morgue of people. People had arrived, or tried to arrive.

It was a devastating time for those people, for naval and customs personnel, who I later on met privately because of their brave actions.

They didn’t have to go in that day. And I assure you, I was aware of it before then.

But even after then, I was very much instrumental in moving and changing the policy of the ALP to take on a more deterrent position in relation to people who leave countries of transition, which was the case of that. Because I do believe that you have to have deterrents.

And, frankly, we did try to put some things in place and we’ll never know if they were to work.

But I’ll tell you this, I didn’t join up with the Greens, like Scott Morrison, Tony Abbott and Peter Dutton, to stop us trying to put in place a Malaysian arrangement. They voted with the Greens, not because they thought that the Malaysian arrangement wouldn’t work, they voted with the Greens because they were scared it would. So they acted in a partisan way back then on this issue.

Now, frankly, we did put in offshore processing. But we do believe that processing should happen, but we put it in place. This government, and I’ll give it credit, obviously, put in other element that has provided a deterrence. And Labor supports Operation Sovereign Borders.

... We were looking to try other options as well and, frankly, Peter Dutton and others lined up with the Greens and stopped that in the parliament. That’s the truth of it. That’s what happened because they played base domestic politics instead of putting the national interest first. And that’s what we were left with.

I will pay tribute to the ability to stop those vessels, but can I just say in relation to offshore processing, we need to also process people. It’s a verb. Pursuant to our obligations under the convention. You don’t leave people indefinitely in a hellish hole as has happened.

Updated at 4.43am BST

4.22am BST

The two debaters can now ask each other a question.

Brendan O’Connor:

Upon reflection, when you think to the comments that you made about it being inconceivable that we would not engage in a war with a nuclear superpower, given an invasion of Taiwan that might involve the United States, do you think on reflection, answering that hypothetical in the affirmative was the right thing to do? And would you say it again?

Peter Dutton:

Well, we have an alliance with the United States. It served us well for decades. The United States has been the underpinning of security in our own region for the last 80 years.

And I know at different times during Labor’s history, including the leadership of Mark Latham – and I think that you voted for Mark – there was talk about breaking the alliance with the United States.

That will never happen under a Coalition government. We are a population of 25.8 million people.

We have, in many ways, punched above our weight. We are a great and reliable friend and ally, not just in our region, but with the big and mighty within the five eyes context, and beyond that, in the Quad and elsewhere.

So do I think that we would shirk away from our responsibility to be a good ally with the United States? No, I don’t. And I don’t think that that would be in the interests of our country. I think that you would put us in an incredibly precarious position if Labor again decided to break the alliance with the United States.

I think that that would be a travesty. And I don’t think ...

O’Connor:

That’s never happened.

Dutton:

It was spoken about. And the hard left of the Labor party would break the alliance with the United States tomorrow. You can go through your ...

O’Connor:

Absurd.

Dutton:

... colleagues one by one who would seek to do that. And this is a time where we need to stand up together. Brendan today hasn’t been able to point out one quote of Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare of criticism of our country.

O’Connor:

You haven’t given me an opportunity. You should ask me that question!

Dutton:

... Not one.

And I think that when you look at who has changed in the region, it is China. And as I’ve said before, I want to make sure that we can have a normalised relationship, but we’re not going to cede our democracy or we’re not going to be in a position where we don’t question human rights abuses.

We are a country that stands up for our values and we’re not going to deviate from that. And that’s the strength of the Coalition. And that is the choice that people have to make at this election, between a weak government led by Anthony Albanese, who will take money away from defence, or a proven track record of the Morrison government of supporting the men and women of the ADF and investing in a record way to keep our country safe.

Updated at 4.39am BST

4.17am BST

Q: Do you think that China will change given that the world is moving towards a tougher stance?

Peter Dutton:

My assessment is no. I think if you look at the relationship between China and Russia, at a time when the rest of the world is applying sanctions in a unified way, or condemning Russia for the acts of aggression, China is forming this unbreakable bond.

When you look at the amassing of nuclear weapons, militarisation in the South China Sea and also looking at what’s at the shared land border at the hands of Chinese troops in the last few years, I think it’s deeply concerning and it’s heading in one direction.

And that’s why we do need to be strong, not weak, as Labor were when they were first in government. And we need to make sure that we stand with our allies, and that’s been the basis of the Aukus agreement, so that we can project that strength.

I want nothing more than a normalised relationship with China. We have an incredible diaspora community here. Wonderful Australians who worked hard, they’ve educated their children [are] law abiding and a huge part of the migration to the country. But the direction of the Chinese government at the moment, including in our own region, is alarming and we should be realistic about it.

Updated at 4.35am BST

4.15am BST

Brendan O’Connor rebuts that:

I don’t agree with the conspiracy theory that there’s a benefit for China given the position that Labor has taken in relation to China and its changed conduct. If I’m allowed to finish Peter, you just had your go.

As I just said from the outset, we know China has changed. We know it’s now more assertive, more aggressive, more coercive.

And in fact, Penny Wong, who has just been verballed by Peter, made that clear in contributions last year where she outlined the significant shift that’s happened in the region.

And as Dennis Richardson said, an eminent, or probably the most eminent former head of security agencies, there’s many agencies as we all know, said that it is not in this country’s interest for a political party to attack the other major political party on the basis of appeasing China – particularly when it’s untrue.

Q: Where would relations with China be different under Labor compared to the government?

O’Connor:

I think that we’ve been saying now for some time, we’ve agreed with the government.

When I’ve been asked questions about am I blaming the government for the changed behaviour of China, I’ve made it unequivocally clear that it is not the Australian government or Australia that’s changed its behaviour.

It is China. It has become aggressive, assertive and coercive and it’s using and applying methods of operation that we would not operate under those same forms of behaviour.

I’ve made that very clear. Anthony Albanese has made that very clear. Penny Wong has made that very clear. I think that the reality is, yes, you will see China involve itself in our matters from time to time improperly. But that doesn’t mean that it wants one over the other, and of course, it suits Peter’s purposes to suggest otherwise.

Updated at 4.32am BST

4.13am BST

Q: You [Peter Dutton] and Mr Morrison say that Labor are about appeasing China. What do you mean by that? How would they appease China? And you said in parliament, the CCP wants Labor to win. Why do you think that?

Peter Dutton:

Well, Andrew, I’m looking forward to Brendan’s response to my answer.

Brendan O’Connor:

I have got a response!

Dutton:

Give him two minutes!

I think Andrew, we are dealing with the reality of a new China.

And I think that Australians should be wide-eyed about this. I think that people should be under no illusion.

There’s no need to embellish the intelligence we’re reading. There’s no need to pretend it is something that is happening.

The fact is that every like-minded country has drawn a similar conclusion about the direction of China.

Now there’s no doubt in my mind that the Chinese Communist Party would like to see a change of government at the May 21 election. No question at all.

And I think that there’s evidence of that on the WeChat activity, which is a Communist Party dominated and influenced platform. The interference with the prime minister’s own WeChat page there.

The way in which editors of Chinese language newspapers in our country have been lent on, I think is further evidence. And other elements, obviously, that I can’t go into publicly.

So I stand by that statement. Believe it very strongly.

And in relation to the appeasement element – I think that if you look at all of the language of Penny Wong.

Penny Wong believes that she can go to Beijing on a charm offensive and she could change the direction of China under President Xi. President Xi, of course, would be laughing under his breath as he was entertaining his dear friend in Beijing and only if she was able to wind back some of the acts of aggression from the Morrison government, from signing Aukus, to acquiring missile capability, that the conversation could continue.

And they continue to buy time.

I’ve been open and frank in my commentary because I want to see our country stay safe. I want to see our region continue the prosperity. I want to see people in countries that surround us that aren’t as wealthy as we are lifted from poverty and we can only do that if we’ve got security and peace in our region. And that’s at the heart of everything we’re trying to do to defend our nation.

Updated at 4.29am BST

4.09am BST

Brendan O’Connor:

I effectively agree that ideally you build defence assets here.

Obviously, there would be parts of such an asset that would not be built here – with the propelled components of the submarine – but you’d want to build it over time. I agree it’s very unlikely that there will be a submarine provided to us. And even if this were, we don’t have the crew trained to properly operate that asset. My view on defence assets across the board is that ideally you manufacture them here. That’s a sovereign capability.

Secondly, if you can’t build it all here, you build as much as you can here, and if it’s a long-term contract, you look to increase the proportion of local content over the course of the contract.

So in other words, you build in an increased capacity for the local defence industry to deliver. Because sovereign capability is an asset in and of itself. And we know that there are going to be supply chain problems. If you think about what’s being delivered to Ukraine at the moment, which has been remarkable and more needs to be done – we know that.

But that leads to shortages elsewhere. So what it really says to me is we need to find ways to increase our stockpile, increase our capacity to build assets without relying on others if we can. And that takes a lot of investment. And I think that we need to be thinking in those ways, on those terms, when we talk about assets. As a defence minister, though, you want to make sure that you’ve got what you’ve got to defend the nation. But along the way, you have to build up the capability to do it here. Not just for jobs, not just for the economy, but for defending the country.

Updated at 4.25am BST

4.07am BST

Q: If either of you receive advice as defence minister that you could get the first nuclear submarine in the water five years sooner if you build it in America or Britain – and I’m talking majority build, assembled in one of those countries – would you do that? Would you build one or two of the first nuclear submarines to get that capability sooner?

Peter Dutton:

A couple of things. There’s constraints, obviously, within, and again, coming back to my point before about dealing with the reality here. There are constraints within the supply chains in both US and the UK. That’s the reality.

Again, if you look at nuclear submarine and submarine even diesel and electric manufacturing construction around the world, everybody is at capacity because they’re watching the way in which the Chinese are ramping up their own assets at the moment.

So I think that from our perspective we’ve been clear about our commitment to Osborne, to domestic capability, and the Americans have also spoken very strongly about nuclear stewardship, which is important to them, because they don’t want an accident, and, of course, nobody, including ourselves, want any accident. We want to acquire the skills.

We want to train the people up. As Brendan pointed out before, the government has scholarships and we’re enrolling people in nuclear programs etc to be able to crew the submarine.

So it’s difficult to see that prospect. But our commitment is to see them built here in South Australia and I hope that we can make an announcement as to which submarine we’re going with in a condensed period, shorter than the 18 months that we’ve spoken about, and we’re on track to be able to do that. And then I think we’ll look at ways in which we can condense that timeline.

Updated at 4.23am BST

4.06am BST

Brendan O’Connor:

We want to see the submarines delivered under Aukus. Anthony Albanese wrote to Scott Morrison and indicated that we’d like to be part of a bipartisan committee to oversight the 18-month review.

Now Prime Minister Scott Morrison chose not to do that. But we do have a bipartisan approach to make sure that we get the best assets possible.

And it’s not just submarines, either, I might add. It’s obviously other technologies. And Peter’s right – we get access to other technologies and Britain which we’ve not had before.

And that gives us an opportunity to access, and in accessing those technologies to invest in research and innovate ... through that collaboration.

So that’s the first thing that I would say. In relation to the potential gap or the perceived gap that might exist between now and then, firstly, I would agree with Peter, that the Collins Class submarines are capable ... to that extent, we should be there and we’ve got the crew.

However, if we can bring forward the delivery of nuclear-propelled submarines, that would be a good thing. In doing that, we need to do a lot of things.

It’s not just the boat itself.

We have to invest in the skills to actually crew those submarines, and I know already, the ADF are working with our counterparts in the UK and US navy to be acquainted with those skills.

But we will need to invest a lot more, because it takes a lot of effort to find the people, the submariners, who are willing to be on the boats, let alone be on the larger boats to stay longer.

But we do need to do it as quickly as we can, and if we can expedite that process and work out a way to deliver those assets we should do that. Just in relation to the capability, it may not be needed, and I agree with Peter, another submarine.

But we do need to see whether there’s other capability gaps. It might be looking at the Hobart destroyer. Whether we need to have more of those. There might be other things. So look, it’s very difficult from opposition to make decisions on some of those most significant complex contracts.

But if elected, the first thing that we would be doing is getting a complete assessment from the National Security Committee of cabinet, from the ADF, the defence department and others, about what is needed to be done, capability gaps, medium [and] long-term gaps. That will be a priority of an Albanese Labor government.

Updated at 4.20am BST

4.02am BST

Q: Picking up on where Brendan left on capability – and specifically submarines – by current projections we’ll be getting the first nuclear-powered submarines for Australia in the late 2030s. Do either of you believe that can be significantly sped up? And what else can we do to meet the submarine capability gap? Specifically, why aren’t we looking at an interim capability, a so-called son of Collins?

Peter Dutton:

Couple of points. Firstly, the United States hadn’t shared intellectual property – the secret behind the reactor – with any other country and hadn’t done so since 1958, when they shared it with the Brits.

So the historic element of Aukus, and not just in submarines, to what we’re doing in space and other areas of endeavour, is quite remarkable.

I think our country should be very proud of that. In relation to the submarines, I do believe having been central to the negotiations to the agreement and the subsequent discussions, that we can acquire capability much sooner than what some of the pundits are projecting at the moment.

And we’ll have more to say about that if we’re elected later in the year. I think it’s remarkable that the United States and the United Kingdom have allowed us to conduct the negotiations in the way that we have.

We’ve had people from the US and UK visiting Osborne here in Canberra meeting our experts and similarly we’ve had an exchange to London and to Washington.

They want us to acquire that capability, because they know that it is required in our part of the world.

In terms of the capability we have now, I don’t want anybody to underestimate the ability of the Collins Class.

The Collins Class in its modern form has a stealth-like capability which makes it the equal of the US and the UK boats. It works alongside them and it does so in an incredibly efficient fashion and that’s recognised by both the Brits and the Americans.

We don’t want a third class of submarines and I know that some commentators continue to write this. The clearest advice I had in relation to our discussions about whether we should go with the nuclear submarines came from the chief of the defence force, the chief of navy and the vice-chief of the defence force not to go with a third platform, and there are many reasons – and we don’t have time to go into them now – as to why you wouldn’t do that.

Cost is one, but far down the list.

It is not in our national interest to pretend that we could have a third class of submarine. Somehow we can buy it off the shelf. I want someone to explain to me where this shelf is.

Because I don’t know. I don’t know where the submarine shelf is. The used car yard down the road here where there’s an 86-model submarine for sale that nobody else has acquired. I’d be down there in a heartbeat, but it’s not the reality. So let’s stick to the facts.

Updated at 4.15am BST

3.58am BST

Brendan O’Connor rebuts Peter Dutton’s answer:

We did commission Armidale vessels. We got on track the destroyers that had fallen off the rails in the Howard years. We had to commission a review into the Collins Class submarines because only one was left in the water after the Howard years and it was through that review we got up to five of the six in the water at any one time – a massive renovation – increasing the optimal capability of those submarines was critical. So we did many things.

But I think it’s also important to most note things have dramatically changed and it’s almost like Peter doesn’t want to recognise that.

I mean a year after we lost office, you know, Tony Abbott was inviting President Xi Jinping to address the parliament. That’s how much things have changed since then. Of course, you do reflect your investment in defence and national security based on advice we’re provided.

Now the strategic update of 2020 provided to the government talks about the need to invest more. But one of the problems I have is the little investments that’s been made on the short-term capability gaps that needs to be addressed.

Updated at 4.09am BST

3.56am BST

Peter Dutton answers:

I don’t want anybody to be left with the impression today that the Labor party will increase funding if they’re elected on 21 May. Brendan’s words then effectively parroted the words said before the election of the Rudd government.

Labor will always give you a guarantee that they’re going to spend money or more money in government on defence and they always, without exception, regardless of the circumstances, regardless of how precarious the times might be, the projections that are available to you, they always find a higher priority and always take money away from the defence force, which means the men and women of the Australian Defence Force, as you point out, and it also means away from our ability to acquire the capability that those men and women need.

Now over the forward estimates, defence spending increases on average by 5.7% year on year.

We will spend in 2022-23 about $48bn in defence and we will continue to grow that each year, and to the other point that you made in your question, do we need to spend more on defence? Yes, we do.

Because on every prediction the circumstances will deteriorate in our region and potentially in Europe and I don’t think anybody at the moment could predict the situation in the Indo-Pacific or indeed in Europe in 12 months’ time, in 12 years’ time.

So the capability that we need to acquire for today is incredibly important and we’re doing that and we need to make sure that we’re providing for the uncertainty of tomorrow.

But you don’t do that in the way in which Labor did it. I would love today to be commissioning a submarine that Labor had ordered, or even, you know, a single boat – not one.

Not one during their time in government. And I have to live with that. And the Australian public has to live with that reality. And would it be repeated if they came into government again? Of course it would, because the hollow promises that you’re hearing now are exactly what you heard in the run-up to the 2007 election.

Updated at 4.05am BST

3.55am BST

Q: Like many a marginal seat family, the defence department and the ADF are on a fixed income, so that means obviously that the $270bn new capabilities, under the integrated investment program, that money erodes over time with inflation. And inflation, as we know, is running rampant, particularly in the United States, where we buy most of our major capabilities, missiles, etc, that we need to defend this country. So ASPI estimates Australia lost an additional $700m on 2021-22 on revised inflation numbers and that’s looking like being $1.4bn in 2022-23. So to both of you, I’d like to ask – and this is before you even get to the question of do we need to lift defence spending to face the China threat – will you consider in the short to medium term boosting the defence budget to counteract the corrosive effects of inflation on the defence budget?

Brendan O’Connor:

I think, of course, we know that inflation is running very high under this government, despite its promise of providing economic dividends to the Australian people that inflation is running at a high rate.

You have to make decisions about what it means for costs and if elected a Labor government will have to examine that, have to examine the impact of inflation on any policy, but in particular, in terms of the circumstances we’re in, we have to look at it in terms of national security and defence.

I want to take up the comment made by Peter in relation to our record on defence expenditure. Firstly, things were different back then. If you look at the expenditure of the Rudd-Gillard years and compare them with the Howard years, the government’s, on average, annually was between 1.7% and 1.8% of GDP on average per year.

That’s the reality and Peter and others can keep talking about one year. On average – remember these contracts go for five, 10, 20, 30 years and it’s really about the ongoing expenditure, not picking out one year to suit your political argument. I make the point that’s the case.

Secondly, Labor does support a minimum of 2%. We support the expenditure that Peter has outlined in terms of the defence acquisitions. We support the defence budget overall. But I take your point – any government, whoever ... whether the government’s re-elected or we’re elected – will have to examine the impact on what it means for defence assets and acquiring those assets.

Updated at 4.02am BST

3.52am BST

And then Brendan O’Connor responds to that (this is all from the first question):

We are stating the obvious – that the relationship with Pacific Island countries, and in particular Solomon Islands, has deteriorated in recent times.

You can imagine what Scott Morrison may have said as opposition leader if this had happened under Labor’s watch.

The fact is it’s happened under Scott Morrison’s watch and he has to take some responsibility.

As always, whether it was failing to get vaccinations, or delivering RAT tests, even in this area of national security, Scott Morrison refuses to accept responsibility for a failure to properly engage and prevent a compact between China ... I mean we’re talking about an island that’s a 2,000km flight from our eastern coastline. It is of concern to us and it will be ... There’ll be a lot of effort now having to mitigate the chances of a naval base being established by the Chinese in the years to come.

Updated at 3.56am BST

3.51am BST

'Not a word of criticism for our country,' says Peter Dutton of Solomon Islands

And then Peter Dutton responds to that:

A couple of points. I want to dispel this myth that Labor’s been peddling over the last few weeks that somehow the problem in the Indo-Pacific is of Australia’s making. It is not. It is not.

If you look at Prime Minister Sogavare’s own words, not just what he’s had to say in the last 24 hours or so, but what he’s had to say in the run-up to this agreement with China, he has not a word of criticism for our country.

He’s not saying that the relationship is broken. He’s not saying that Australia is an unreliable partner. He’s not saying that Scott Morrison hasn’t engaged with him in a leader-to-leader dialogue.

He’s not saying we aren’t providing support through capacity-building. There’s none of that coming out in the word of the Solomon Islands government. It is all coming out, for political reasons, from Labor.

The reason this is happening is because China under President Xi is on a different path. They’re amassing nuclear weapons. You’re seeing in the South China Sea the militarisation of 20 points of reclaimed territory and if the Labor party can’t see that, they only see a need to bag us through the course of a campaign, then I think it demonstrates they’re unfit for government at the election.

Updated at 3.55am BST

3.49am BST

O'Connor: Morrison 'doesn’t get soft-power diplomacy'

Brendan O’Connor responds:

I don’t agree with that, of course. Bob Hawke actually spent more money on defence per annum than the Howard government.

Bob Hawke commissioned the Collins Class submarines, the only submarines we’ve ever had in this country. With respect to Solomon Islands, we have failed there. We have failed to prevent a security pact between the Solomon Islands and China.

And I’m not suggesting it was easy to stop but more should have been done. The foreign minister should have been there. I mean, Peter, Scott Morrison should have got on the phone to the prime minister of the Solomon Islands and actually, you know, pleaded with him not to go down this path.

We know that other Pacific Island countries are not happy with this arrangement. We needed to do more earlier.

If you look at the national security intelligence, we were aware of the move in the Solomon Islands in this direction for years. We know they changed their affiliation from Taiwan to Beijing three years ago. So we had plenty of warning to be putting in an effort.

But frankly, I agree with Peter that we have to invest more in defence. And things have changed now compared to 10 years ago. Of course we need to invest more and that’s why we support the investment that’s being made.

But you need also to deploy diplomacy. You need to invest in the region. They must be your friends, not just your neighbours. You have to treat them equally and, frankly, they don’t feel we’ve done that because we mock them on things that concern them.

We’ve derided them about their concerns about climate change. We’ve recently announced a policy that will invest more, helping them with their surveillance, helping them train their military, investing in broadcasting. Australia has to have a voice in the region.

Now Scott Morrison thinks it’s funny that we would want to actually broadcast in the region. He doesn’t get soft-power diplomacy. He doesn’t understand statecraft ... and that’s why we’re in this predicament.

Updated at 3.55am BST

3.48am BST

Q: We’ve seen the early parts of the election campaign dominated by the security agreement between the Solomon Islands and China. A straightforward question for you both: Is Australia less safe today because of this agreement?

Peter Dutton:

I’m happy to go first. I think Australia is, alongside the United States and the United Kingdom, with India, with Japan, with many other countries in our region, in lockstep in the effort to maintain peace in our region.

But I don’t think we should pretend to the Australian people that we don’t live in an uncertain time.

I acknowledge the incredible work of my colleague Senator Zed Seselja and the way he’s engaged in the Pacific. But it is a tough market.

And as we’re seeing right across the region, in fact right across the world, China’s influence into Africa, their influence into broader Asia, their influence into even Europe is quite phenomenal.

And the Labor party talking down our country at this time is not in our national best interest. So how are we a safer country? How are we a safer country?

Well, we’re a safer country by investing in the defence forces, and that is exactly what this government has done.

We arrested the money that was taken out of defence when Labor was in government and we’ve reinstated money into defence and we have acquired capability which will underpin our security and provide a greater capacity to contribute to the effort of the allies over the next decades.

And that is a very significant choice for people to make at this election, whether they risk those gains to go back to the uncertainty that Labor provides on national security.

Brendan’s very fond of bringing up John Curtin and talking about 80 years ago. And I agree with him. I mean that was the last Labor prime minister who had any interest of matters of national security or defence.

Updated at 3.51am BST

3.45am BST

Brendan O’Connor finishes with:

And that’s why we do need a government that thinks strategically and long term. We need a government that won’t offend our friends. We need a government that enhances local content. We need a government that engages more in our region. Frankly, friends, we need to do better. We need to elect an Albanese Labor government.

Updated at 3.48am BST

3.43am BST

The Labor shadow defence minister, Brendan O’Connor, opens his speech with a call back to Curtin and Australia turning towards the US during the second world war.

He then moves into his criticism of the Coalition’s handling of the defence portfolio:

I think it’s also fair to say that the Morrison government’s made some serious national security mistakes, some significant foreign policy missteps.

They’ve had six defence ministers in nine years. They’ve had four defence ministers in four years under Scott Morrison, which has resulted in inadequate oversight and focus on this portfolio.

They’ve not only failed to deliver a submarine in almost a decade, they’ve spent $5,500m not doing so.

They have had helicopters that can’t provide cover fire for our troops, and have cancelled that contract. It’s wasting billions of dollars.

A frigate contract that is delayed, riddled with serious engineering issues, billions of dollars over budget. Existing vessels with too little firepower, not updating the Naval Shipbuilding Plan as promised.

Our only armed drone program, SkyGuardian, cancelled inexplicably. They’ve announced an extension to the life of Collins Class six years later than advised. Scott Morrison allowed for the Darwin Port to be leased to a state-owned Chinese operate for 99 years. Just remember that.

Updated at 3.48am BST

3.39am BST

Peter Dutton finishes with:

Now we’ve undone Labor’s damage and we’ve lifted defence spending to 2% of GDP. There would today have been $55bn less in defence had Labor still been in government. This election is about deciding the choice and whether you risk Labor with our national security.

Updated at 3.43am BST

3.37am BST

'You can only preserve peace by preparing for war,' says Peter Dutton

Peter Dutton is straight into it:

We live in times echoing the 1930s, with belligerent autocrats seeking to once again use force to achieve political outcomes. If history has taught us anything, it is that when dictators are on the march, you can only preserve peace by preparing for war.

You can only deter aggression from a position of strength, and the Morrison government is committed to building that stronger, safer Australia. Ukraine has demonstrated very clearly, if anyone needed reminding, that direct military action can only be repelled by a direct military response. We know this, and so do potential aggressors.

The Morrison government is committed to building a larger, stronger and better-equipped Australian Defence Force.

Screenshot from National Press Club debate between Brendan O’Connor and Peter Dutton — Screenshot from the National Press Club debate between Brendan O’Connor and Peter Dutton. Photograph: ABC TV

Updated at 3.42am BST

3.34am BST

Peter Dutton opens with a thanks for those who have served or are serving in the defence force and the Ukrainian ambassador:

Can I acknowledge all of those in the audience who wear our country’s uniform or have in the past? And thank you very much for your service too. Our ambassadors today and a warm welcome to each of you in particular, and I point out to those who are watching today and didn’t see the acknowledgement of the Ukrainian ambassador before, for which there was a round of applause. We don’t often see it at the press club but to respect and honour you, sir, and your people and what Ukraine is going through at the moment.

Updated at 3.40am BST

3.28am BST

Peter Dutton has won the coin toss and elected to speak first in the debate.

We will bring you that as soon as it begins.

3.22am BST

Defence debate at National Press Club

Peter Dutton and Brendan O’Connor are about to face off at the National Press Club.

Updated at 3.31am BST

3.20am BST

More evidence home ownership has become harder for a variety of reasons – and it’s only going to become even more impossible for those already struggling to enter the market.

Holding a new mortgage is now historically expensive... and unlike those who had loans in the 1980s and 1990s, the benefit of falling interest rates is not going to happen

https://t.co/Q0TC1Hl7Rn pic.twitter.com/2Gcz4cKfqE
— Greg Jericho (@GrogsGamut) May 5, 2022

Updated at 3.26am BST

3.15am BST

There is a bit of chatter around One Nation’s “ghost” candidates as well.

Pauline Hanson’s party pledged to run someone in all 151 seats. But as Joe Hinchliffe and Michael McGowan have been reporting, not all candidates are known – or even seen – in the electorate they are running in.

Updated at 3.18am BST

3.05am BST

Given all the talk around Anthony Albanese deferring questions to his shadow ministers, it is worth revisiting this story from Daniel Hurst in February last year:

Scott Morrison has avoided answering parliamentary questions by referring them to ministerial colleagues 189 times since becoming prime minister, new analysis reveals.

The analysis, undertaken by the parliament’s independent procedure office in response to a request from Labor, indicates there have been a further 62 times when Morrison answered a question in part before asking another minister to add to the answer.

By contrast, the procedure office reported that it could not find any similar cases when Julia Gillard was prime minister from 2010 to 2013.

But in that same article, Tony Burke said:

He doesn’t answer journalists’ questions in press conferences, and he won’t answer our questions in parliament,” Burke said.

Mr Morrison is always there to take credit for good news, even when he’s had nothing to do with it. But when the questions get tough, he hides behind his ministers.”

So neither side is clean on this issue.

Updated at 3.27am BST

2.55am BST

Barnaby Joyce is in Ayr in Queensland (Dawson electorate) where he will no doubt talk about coal.

Updated at 2.59am BST

2.52am BST

In the last post I mentioned Labor’s trade diversification plan has “four main pillars”, including revitalising the relationship with Indonesia.

The other three pillars are:

An Export Market and Product Diversification Strategy, involving “a whole-of-government approach to revigorate our engagement with the emerging markets of the Indo-Pacific and identifying emerging areas of potential Australian export strength, such as digital health and financial services”. Labor is promising early ministerial visits to Indonesia, India, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore and Vietnam. An Albanese Labor government would “establish a cross-sectoral Trade 2040 Taskforce, bringing together all relevant agencies, industry and experts, and reporting to key ministers”. This would look for areas of Australian strength that are currently underdeveloped for export markets, and develop strategies for maximising export potential. There will also be a Ministerial-level Technical Barriers to Trade working group to tackle biosecurity barriers for Australian exports.
A renewed focus on building economic ties with India. Labor says that will include commissioning a post-pandemic update of the 2018 India Economy Strategy conducted by former Dfat secretary Peter Varghese. Labor would also seek to institute an annual India-Australia Economic Dialogue between each nation’s Trade Minister and Treasurer. And it said it would seek to improve “India literacy in the business community … from a language and culture point of view”. It would create a pilot in-country Indian language study program, modelled on the Australian Consortium of In-Country Indonesian Studies (ACICIS).
Seeking to include Australia’s trading partners in multilateral economic fora. The shadow trade minister, Madeleine King, said in the face of “rising economic coercion we must work to strengthen the global rules-based trade system and hold countries that break these rules to account”. She said Australia should “engage fully within rich tapestry of regional architecture in the Indo-Pacific”. King said Labor would support the accession of Indonesia, Thailand and South Korea to the big trade deal known as the CPTPP, adding: “We will work to cooperate with the US on the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, and encourage their participation in other regional fora, such as the CPTPP. Labor will also support India’s membership of APEC and RCEP, if it wishes to join.”

Updated at 2.56am BST

2.42am BST

Labor accuses Coalition of ‘cynical and stupid’ lack of attention to Indonesia relationship

Labor has accused the Coalition of a “cynical and stupid” lack of attention to the relationship with Indonesia.

The shadow trade minister, Madeleine King, made the startling claim during a speech in Perth outlining Labor’s plans for trade diversification (this is a buzzword that means reducing the reliance on a single market, ie China).

Speaking at the Perth USAsia Centre, King said the Indonesia-Australia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (IA-CEPA) had been signed three years ago but “since then has mostly just gathered dust”:

There has been very little effort made by the Morrison government in developing our trading relationship with our nearest neighbour. It’s as though they have a blind spot when it comes to our near abroad ...

Indonesia is set to be the fourth largest economy in the world – behind the US, China and India – within two decades. IA-CEPA is a great foundation but the fact that the relationship has languished since it was signed is both cynical and stupid. And, frankly, unforgivable.

The Liberals’ approach to international trading relationships is set-and-forget: they’re all about the photo opportunity at the trade deal signing ceremony, but have failed in doing any of the follow-up.

It’s not the first time King has accused the Coalition of a “set-and-forget” attitude to trade agreements. This comes, of course, after the Morrison government cited the finalisation of trade deals with the UK and India in the past year as proof of its commitment to trade diversification.

King today announced a trade diversification plan with “four main pillars”, one of which is to revitalise Australia’s trade relationship with Indonesia. She said an Albanese Labor government would seek to establish an economic 2+2 ministerial dialogue with Indonesia:

The annual Economic Ministerial Dialogue will be augmented by a +1 set of ministers from each side, changing each year based on discussion priorities. For example, we might include infrastructure ministers one year – to bring Australian expertise to the grand challenge of building the new Indonesian capital of Nusantara in East Kalimantan, a province on the island of Borneo. A remarkable vision and one Australia and Indonesia can work on together.

King said called for dialogue between the respective health ministers to “work together on bringing Australia’s expertise in digital health services across its rural and remote areas to the challenging geography of Indonesia and its thousands of islands”. Labor would also activate the joint Australian-Indonesian trade in goods, trade in services, investment and economic cooperation committees in chapter 18 of the existing trade deal.

She said Labor would also focus on enhancing Indonesia literacy among Australian students under an existing program that is “vital to our people-to-people relationships with our nearest and very important neighbour”.

Updated at 2.55am BST

2.33am BST

Queensland reports 11 Covid deaths

Queensland also has an increase in deaths to report for the last 24 hours:

Today we have recorded 8,045 new COVID-19 cases.

Sadly, we have reported 11 deaths in the past 24 hours.

Full details➡️ https://t.co/MyDwPPidE5 pic.twitter.com/Saotk0TVBt
— Queensland Health (@qldhealth) May 5, 2022

Updated at 2.38am BST

2.08am BST

Paul Daley has also had a look at the campaigns:

Updated at 2.09am BST

2.01am BST

The former Liberal seat of Hughes is one the Liberals are hoping to win back as part of their election tally (sitting MP Craig Kelly resigned from the Liberals and is now running for Clive Palmer’s party)

Anne Davies has a story on a candidates’ forum there:

Several audience members walked out of a candidates’ forum in the southern Sydney seat of Hughes on Wednesday evening after the maverick MP Craig Kelly labelled mandatory vaccination in workplaces “an abuse of human rights” and “a very dark period in Australia’s history”.

Kelly, who quit the Liberal party last year and is now standing for the United Australia party, said Australia was violating human rights by allowing workplaces to insist on vaccination:

The people who engage in the mandates in this country, forcing other Australians against their free will and without their consent to force them into a medical intervention, are blackmailing people. It’s unAustralian and against everything we stand for.

Several people in the audience walked out, while other panel members looked perplexed.

Updated at 2.07am BST

1.45am BST

It’s an odd world we live in and this election campaign is sometimes among the oddest bits.

The Labor leader, Anthony Albanese, and his climate and energy spokesperson, Chris Bowen, visited the Smart Energy Council’s conference in Sydney this morning. Bowen gave a standard speech to an audience of energy wonks and clean energy businesses.

Many have an eye to profit, sure, but others have worked out that a hotter world is not going to be great for families, communities, economies ... and political leaders.

Albanese was a relatively last-minute booking (4pm yesterday, we hear). He and Bowen looked at solar panels built using technology developed by researchers (which wouldn’t be hard as probably half or more of them of globally have an Australian contribution).

There was also a refitted electric truck that will run 700km on batteries that can be replaced within minutes. Cheaper to run and without a supply line that runs (vulnerably) through thousands of kilometres.

But climate action might not get much coverage. Why? Because Albo couldn’t remember all six points of Labor’s six-point NDIS plan.

The press pack smelt blood. In a break, Albanese got an adviser to dig up the policy paper. A staffer duly handed it to him but unhelpfully did not open it to the relevant page. Up close, I could see Albanese’s hands trembling as he struggled to find the right page.

@AlboMP finds Labor’s six-point NDIS plan (after a nervous search), as @Bowenchris looks on at the @SmartEnergyCncl conference in Sydney that the travelling press pack couldn’t give an electric truck about…. #auspoI #ausvotes #AusVotes2022 pic.twitter.com/ON5Ci0CJg1
— Peter Hannam (@p_hannam) May 5, 2022

Trying to regain his footing, Albo is asked for his five-point aged care plan, and that he can recount.

Just metres away, leading US climate scientist Mike Mann is telling the audience about the challenges coming. The 50-plus degree temperatures punishing millions and millions of people on Asia’s subcontinent get discussed.

What kind of present faces them – let alone the future?

Updated at 2.05am BST

1.35am BST

Worse health outcomes for those outside cities, NSW inquiry finds

The New South Wales government has been handed 44 recommendations to fix dire healthcare issues in regional, rural and remote parts of the state in a scathing report released today aftger a year-long inquiry.

The inquiry found people living outside metropolitan areas had “significantly poorer health outcomes”, were more likely to suffer from chronic disease and die prematurely, and had inferior access to services – especially those in Indigenous communities. Two dozen findings were made in the report released this morning, including that there were significant financial challenges for regional patients when compared with people living in cities.

The report also that there was significant under-resourcing and the funding divide between the state and commonwealth governments “has led to both duplication and gaps in service delivery”.

The disadvantage and discrimination experienced in Indigenous communities was also highlighted in the report:

It is unacceptable that some First Nations people still experience discrimination when seeking medical assistance in some rural, regional and remote hospitals in New South Wales. Telehealth has created another barrier for First Nations people in terms of accessing culturally appropriate health services.

The inquiry also found there was a “culture of fear” within the department that meant people were less willing to come forward with issues. Among the extensive recommendations was a funding model review, greater engagement with local community groups and more funding for regional nurse practitioners.

The inquiry received more than 700 submissions and held 15 hearings across the state where doctors, patients and administrators outlined the extreme challenges faced in their communities including hospitals operating without doctors, the difficulty of recruiting GPs and the vast distances people traveled for care.

Nurses recounted horror stories including patients dying on bathroom floors, families with loved ones in palliative care being forced to administer intravenous painkillers themselves and cleaners and cooks performing nursing duties.

Updated at 1.47am BST

1.32am BST

Stuart Robert transcript change

This morning the acting education minister, Stuart Robert, bizarrely claimed to have been doing Alan Tudge’s job for “almost 12 months”.

Robert told ABC News Breakfast:

Well, I’m the acting education minister, Lisa, and have been for almost 12 months. So I’ve got full authority in terms of running the education portfolio, as well as skills and workplace and the other things that I do.

In fact, Robert has only been acting education minister since 2 December (five months).
Curiously, the Coalition transcript corrects the error, claiming Robert had said:

I am the acting education minister … and have been for a number of months.”

But the footage is there for all to see:

"I don't know where he is..."

"I'm not across those issues..."

Acting Education Minister @stuartrobertmp when pushed on the whereabouts of Education Minister @AlanTudgeMP, and a $500,000 payment to one of his former staffers. pic.twitter.com/z2FYnYYAuk
— News Breakfast (@BreakfastNews) May 4, 2022

Updated at 1.49am BST

1.32am BST

So not a great showing from either leader in those press conferences.

16.5 days to go.

1.31am BST

Q: We have seen this often in last week or so in the campaign that when you stumble on an answer you can bring in a shadow minister or you defer to them immediately, is that part of the strategy in order to not see the sort of gaffes we saw on day one and the gaffe we have just seen today where you didn’t know your own policy?

Anthony Albanese:

No, that is not right. I do note there have been some bizarre articles which suggest that it is inappropriate for the treasurer, the shadow treasurer, to want to comment on Treasury issues. Jason Clare is the housing spokesperson, might not want to comment on housing policy or Chris Bowen might not want to comment on climate change and energy. I find that extraordinary. I am captain of a team and I am very proud of the team that we have. What we have yesterday, for example, was the education shadow, Tanya Plibersek with me. The education shadow answering questions on education as well as myself. Scott Morrison doesn’t have a team. He doesn’t have a team. He is one out when it comes to policies and when it comes to appearances. Alan Tudge is in witness protection. So many of the government ministers are in witness protection.

Q: What is your five- point plan for aged care?

Albanese:

It is nurses 24/7. It is making sure 215 minutes of care are given. It is making sure that there is better accountability in terms of for every dollar that is spent. It is making sure, as well, that there is better food and nutrition and we will have Maggie Beer help with that. The last and important part is better wages for people in aged care. Thanks, very much.

Updated at 1.42am BST

1.28am BST

Q: What short-term incentives will you provide families who are struggling with the power increases now?

Anthony Albanese:

On that, you can’t fix transmission overnight. There is a time, in terms of construction. We will bring transmission into the 21st century. What this government has done is waste a decade on energy transmission. They have wasted a decade. when it comes to fixing the grid, they have wasted a decade because they have had a view that renewables, they have campaigned against them and said that renewables will increase costs. The truth is renewables will lower costs.

Chris Bowen:

Anthony has just provided the correct answer, a comprehensive answer. Our policies are designed over time to reduce power prices. This is a massive task, $20bn worth of investment in implementing the ISP. We have never suggested that would happen overnight. It sits alongside our other policies in relation to childcare and the other things we will talk about later today, which also impact on cost of living relief.

Updated at 1.31am BST

1.26am BST

While Chris Bowen answers, Anthony Albanese flips through the NDIS policy document an adviser handed him.

Q: Do you not know what the six points are for the NDIS question that you were asked before?

Q: You don’t know your policy document ...

Albanese:

That is not right.

Q: Are these the six points that will have to be handed to you by your adviser?

Q: You have just been handed the six points, Mr Albanese, what are they?

Albanese:

Our policy on the NDIS ...

Q: To confirm, you have just been handed the policy document ...

Albanese:

To defend and fix the NDIS, lifting the NDIA staffing cap, doubling existing funding for advocacy, fixing regional access and stopping waste.

Q: You didn’t know your policy.

Albanese:

[That isn’t true] It is to put people at the centre of the NDIS.

Updated at 1.41am BST

1.22am BST

Q: It is reported that extra spending promised during the election campaign from both sides of politics is adding to inflation pressures and that the federal budget – the government’s federal budget was the cause of the interest rate hike this week. Will you guarantee that under a Labor government you will not be overspending to help with the cost of living pressures and in what way?

Anthony Albanese:

One of the big issues of this election campaign is the quality of the spend. What we will do is cut back on the waste and the rorts of this government. Today at ACCEI I will outline our plan for, penned your that will grow productivity. Our plan to grow productivity by having better industrial relations. Our plan to grow productivity through programs like this here. Our program to grow productivity through childcare that produces a return, all of the economists will say for every dollar invested you get $2 back.

Q: You have put proposal to have a 60% emissions reduction target for 2030. Scott Morrison said that would be catastrophic for the economy. Would a 60% emissions reduction target for 2030 be catastrophic?

Albanese:

Our policies for 43% by 2030. What I am interested in is the implementation of our policy. We don’t have the same policy as the independents or the Greens or Liberal party. What we have as a policy that will actually deliver.

Chris Bowen steps in to answer as well:

Absolutely. Our policy of 43% is more than the target. It is the modelled result of our policies announced. We have taken our policy, safeguards, electric vehicles, and had them modelled and they show a 43% emissions reduction. No other party can say that. The government can’t, the Greens can’t and the independents can’t. We are the only party going to this election with a comprehensive plan and with the evidence to show which levers we will pull to achieve our emissions reductions.

Updated at 1.29am BST

1.20am BST

Q: Just on the Solomons: you were asked about this yesterday what your first action would be to try and repair the relationship. You gave a brief answer. Given the situation has escalated overnight with Manasseh Sogavare suggesting that Australia is treating the Solomons like children with guns, could you detail what you would do to repair that relationship?

Anthony Albanese:

What we would do to repair the relationship is not simple. The fact that the prime minister hasn’t picked up the phone to prime minister Sogavare says an enormous amount about what is needed, in terms of that relationship.

We have outlined a comprehensive Pacific plan. It is about increased aid, dealing with climate change, including hosting a Cop along with the Pacific Island nations. It is about people to people relations, including parliamentary visits. It is about making sure that we have a migration program that allows people from the Pacific to settle here. What they will do is make remittances back to the Solomons and back to other Pacific Island nations.

Updated at 1.26am BST

1.18am BST

Q: Has Labor dumped its longstanding pledge to pay super on top of government-funded parental leave?

Anthony Albanese:

We announce our policies during the campaign. We haven’t announced that as a policy. We support paid parental leave. We can’t commit to everything that we committed to during the last campaign.

Updated at 1.25am BST

1.17am BST

Anthony Albanese fails to list the six points from Labor's NDIS plan

Q: In your speech later on today, you will talk about the legacy of Labor leaders. One of those legacies is the NDIS. Yesterday you talked about Labor’s six-point plan. What are the six points?

Anthony Albanese:

The six points are what we will do in terms of what was outlined by Bill Shorten. That is about making sure ...

Q: What are the six points?

Albanese:

If you let me answer the question ... What that is about is making sure that we take pressure off people who are, at the moment, having their programs cut. We will make sure that there is administrative efficiency. So much is being wasted by the claims that are going forward with legal battles for individuals. What we will do is put people at the centre of the NDIS.

Q: What are the other five points?

Albanese:

We will put people – it is all around the theme of putting people ...

Q: What are the six points?

Albanese:

We will put people at the centre of the NDIS.

Q: What are the six points.

Q: What is your policy?

Albanese:

We will put people at the centre of the NDIS. All of our programs are based upon that.

The journalist keeps asking but Albanese does not answer.

Updated at 1.49am BST

1.14am BST

Q: You are standing in front of an electric truck. Given how politically fraught climate policy was at last election, how confident are you that voter sentiment has changed?

Anthony Albanese:

I am very confident about the position that we are putting forward. It is comprehensive, fully costed. We have outlined it. We outlined it on December 3, from memory, last year. It has been out there for six months. What I am also confident of is that the government are incapable of dealing with the present let alone moving Australia forward into the future.

We saw that absurd front-page splash a couple of weeks ago now during the campaign from Angus Taylor where, when he was asked what was the basis of that – it was nothing and the idea that electric vehicles are not part of our future is just so absurd now. You have had the government creep towards reality but they are incapable of landing it. They have had 22 different energy policies and haven’t landed one. We have one policy, we will land it. It will create jobs. It will make a difference.

Updated at 1.24am BST

1.13am BST

Anthony Albanese makes climate jobs pitch

Anthony Albanese is in Sydney, making a pitch for the jobs which could come with a switch to renewables. Chris Bowen is with him:

We are at the smart energy Expo. This is exciting. The future is here right now. What we need to do in Australia is to learn to commercialise our scientific breakthroughs. There isn’t a PV panel in the world that doesn’t have some intellectual property that came from Australia. From the Australian National University, from the University of New South Wales, what we haven’t always done is commercialise the opportunities, maximise the jobs and economic growth that can come from Australian scientific breakthroughs. Australia is suffering from a cost of living crisis under Scott Morrison. Australians know that the cost of everything is going up but their wages aren’t. Families are under real pressure. Scott Morrison has a plan for the election, Labor has a plan for a better future. Part of that is here right now.

Updated at 1.23am BST

1.09am BST

The journalists must sense that Scott Morrison is getting ready to leave, because they cut across this answer with a lot more questions, interrupting the PP as he gives his election pitch speech.

Q: On Parramatta: it is your fifth visit to this seat. Why haven’t you spent any time in North Sydney or Wentworth, where sitting Liberals are at risk of being turfed out, is it because your brand is toxic there?

Morrison:

I am here in Parramatta because I am here with Maria and at this campaign, there is a choice between a Labor government and a Liberal National government. In this seat here, and all the seats I visit around the country, I am focused on the contest that is happening between the two alternatives for government. I have made the point clear about independents.

That is a vote for chaos, for instability. It is a vote for instability. I don’t outline my program in advance. You all know that. That is how campaigns work. This election is a choice between Labor and between Liberals and Nationals. That is the choice that Australians have to make.

Do they want Mr Albanese who has never done a budget, never held a finance portfolio, doesn’t have an economic plan, is shielded by his shadow ministers daily because he can’t answer fundamental questions.

[Interruptions about why isn’t he answering the question]

He had a housing policy that fell over within 24 hours, an aged care policy that unravelled under 24 hours and a health policy that is uncosted and we are talking about a Labor alternative that won’t stack up when it comes to dealing with the real challenges Australia faces on the economy and national security.

[Interruptions about why isn’t he answering the question]

They are unproven, untested.

We have been proven and tested in one of the most difficult times Australia have faced.

[Interruptions about why isn’t he answering the question]

Yes, we haven’t got everything right. Not every decision we have made Australians would agree with and the times have been difficult.

[Interruptions about why isn’t he answering the question]

There is a choice and it is a choice between whether you want the Liberal and Nationals to run the country and continue that strong economic management or do you want the Labor party supported by the Greens and a cavalcade of independents, where you are inviting chaos and weakness. A strong economy versus a weak economy?

[Interruptions about why isn’t he answering the question]

I am focused on the contest between Labor and Liberal and myself and Mr Albanese.

Updated at 1.22am BST

1.05am BST

Q: On the Solomons issue, it may be Sogavare’s word that we are the preferred security partner but since you said there was an issue here, he has criticised Australia for not doing enough to protect infrastructure and he has suggested Australia has threatened to invade the Solomons ...

Scott Morrison:

None of that is true.

Q: Hasn’t this war of words provided cover for the Solomons to have a deeper relationship with China which was the exact thing we were trying to prevent?

Morrison:

No. What we need to be conscious of is we need to be calm and composed when we deal with these issues that arise. Prime minister Sogavare has entered into a secret arrangement with the Chinese government. He has done that with a number of his cabinet ministers. That didn’t come as a surprise to our government and now we just work responsibly with our partners to manage that situation, to first protect the security interests of Australia but also of the Solomon Islands. We are concerned for the Solomons.

[He is interrupted but keeps going]

We are concerned for the Solomon Islands, for the broader security in the south-west Pacific. Other leaders that I have been in regular contact are equally concerned. Should I have the opportunity, I am looking forward to sit down with all of the Pacific leaders so we can talk to each other as family about the risk this presents, not just in the Solomon Islands but across the Pacific and that is the way we will handle these issues, as a family, as an equal with all other countries in the region and that has been a mark of the approach that I have taken into dealing with the Pacific family as an equal.

Updated at 1.21am BST

1.03am BST

Q: The question about the structural deficit that exists. A $40bn to $60bn, that is not going to be solved by the falling jobless rate or by growing the economy. It is a deficit that needs to be addressed. Will you look at spending cuts after the budget? For example the NDIS is on a pathway, it has hit more than $60bn a year over the decade. You have said you will fund it, will you fully fund it at that pathway or will you look to make savings in that policy as well as other areas?

Scott Morrison:

We always run our programs responsibly. I disagree with you when it comes to how we ensure we can bring the budget back into balance, and the way we were able to do that was ensure our spending was responsibly.

[Not just structural]

The pandemic hit and just as well we did it. Can you imagine what would have happened after the last election if Bill Shorten was elected and he put $387bn worth of higher taxes on the Australian economy?

Could you imagine what our experience would have been over the last three years if we had let Labor loose on the economy after the last election? People know the risk of Labor. These are very serious times. Whether it is on the national security issues you raise, and they are real, of course.

The global economic challenges and the pressures on Australia that are seeing interest rates in the UK and North America and Canada and in New Zealand raise many, many times over, multiples over what we are seeing here in Australia.

The same on cost of living. Prices going up higher overseas and you often say to me at these press conferences, “But we live here in Australia, prime minister.” That is true and that economic shield our policies have put in place have shielded Australians from those higher prices and higher interest rates. It has ensured we have more people in work and it means the businesses like the ones we are in right here, they exist today. If we hadn’t taken the actions we had taken, businesses like this may not be here today, the apprentices who are in work today wouldn’t be in work today.

Updated at 1.20am BST

1.01am BST

Q: On Henry’s question, when did you last speak to him? According to previous stuff you have said it was at the end of last year ...

Scott Morrison:

I said I have had contact with him in last few months.

Q: How can you be assured that we remain the preferred security partner if you haven’t spoken to him in the last four weeks?

Morrison:

Because he has communicated that to me consistently. That is the policy of the Solomon Islands government.

Q: But how do you know?

Morrison:

He hasn’t changed his policy.

Updated at 1.18am BST

12.59am BST

Q: With respect, we have a diplomatic rift with the Solomon Islands. That is clear and evident from what has been said. When was the last time you personally spoke with prime minister Sogavare? What is stopping you from picking up the phone? This is a cry out of attention from him. What is stopping you picking up the phone and speaking leader to leader to de-escalate this?

Scott Morrison:

I can tell you clearly, I am following carefully the advice I get from our security intelligence agencies in how we are responsibly managing the issues in relation to this matter. That is what I am doing. Exactly what I am doing.

Prime minister Sogavare, as Mr Howard has pointed out, has had a number of views about the relationship with Australia over a long period of time.

Our approach has been to be supportive, to answer their call, to ensure we have provided support for vaccines, support when they have asked for it, in terms of military support, police force support, training, we have always been there for the people of the Solomon Islands and we always will be. That doesn’t mean that prime ministers will always agree. I have a different view to him about the role of Russia invading Ukraine. I have had contact with him in the last few months.

Q: The French president has described you as a liar and Minister Sogavare is upset. These are both important partners in our region. Has your Pacific step-up failed? Can these relationships be repaired?

Morrison:

No, it hasn’t and, yes, we will continue to ensure our relationships are managed well.

Updated at 1.17am BST

12.58am BST

Q: There is a lot of focus on what is happening in the US right now, the supreme court considering overturning Wade versus Roe. What is your view on what is happening in the United States now and what is your personal view on a woman’s right to choose?

Scott Morrison:

Two things.

That is a matter for the United States. That is a matter for the United States, it is for them to determine their rules and laws and how they do things. My own view here in Australia is we are not changing any of the settings and I don’t believe we need to change.

Updated at 1.16am BST

12.58am BST

Q: Leading economists are warning that neither major party has a plan to tackle Australia’s structural deficits and spending forecasts have increased over the past three years. Can you rule out cuts to aged care, NDIS, healthcare if you are re-elected to government?

Scott Morrison:

The way you support Medicare, now at $31.4bn a year, the way you support the NDIS, the pension, record investments in aged care. We called the royal commission on aged care, I called it and backed it up in a response totalling some $19.1bn to actually address the serious issues that have been there for over 30 years.

I have said all along the way you pay for these things is by ensuring you have a strong economy.

How do you ensure a strong economy? You need small and family businesses that are being established, successful in employing people, getting them off welfare and getting them into work.

Welfare dependency today is lower than when we came to government. Tax rates are lower than when we came to government.

Investment in essential services, schools, hospitals and Medicare and the NDIS all higher under our government than they were when we came to government.

The reason we have been able to do all these things is because we have a strong economic plan that has not only brought us through the pandemic, ensuring we are performing better than all of the advanced economies in the world, like US, UK, Canada, and so many others, Germany and France, we are doing better than all of them because of the strong economic plan that we have …

We turned the budget around by over $100bn in the last 12 months, that is the single biggest economic turnaround fiscally in a budget we have seen in over 70 years and we did that by growing the economy. That is how you pay for Medicare.

Updated at 1.16am BST

12.56am BST

Q: You have spoken about a red line with the Solomons, do you admit that your rhetoric on the region for a domestic audience has inflamed the situation and potentially damaged your relationship with Manasseh Sogavare?

No.

12.54am BST

Q: Opening a business is a huge financial risk for a lot of people. Why would anyone open a business, take that risk when interest rates are going up, the rising cost of living is going up and they cannot guarantee an income that they would have had when they would have been employed?

Scott Morrison:

[We get a new line with this one]

Forty thousand small business and family businesses have been started in the last five years. One hundred thousand were created in the last 12 months. They are tough times. I have met so many small and family businesses in my role as prime minister, indeed as treasurer before that and going back to when I was immigration minister, because I said so many of our ethnic communities, so entrepreneurial in spirit are seeking to realise the opportunity for themselves and be their own boss and have those economic opportunities.

The passion of small and family businesses is – you can’t quench it and in an economy where unemployment has fallen to 4%, where we have 400,000 more people in work today than we did before the pandemic, where our economic growth is running ahead of the major advanced economies of the world, they see the same opportunities that I see, as we come out of this pandemic, Australia is positioned more strongly than so many of the other advanced economies of the world.

That is why Australia has been able to shield itself from so many of the negative economic impacts. Just this week, we saw the Reserve Bank take the decision which Australians were expecting that eventually the bank would move to release those emergency settings they have had on interest rates.

Let’s look at what has happened overseas. It went up 25 basis points this week, the first time it has risen in over 11 years. Already in the United States it has risen three times that amount. Seventy-five basis points and 50 just overnight. In the UK, it has gone up 65 basis points.

In Canada, it has gone up 75 basis points. Three times what it has here in Australia. In New Zealand, just across the ditch, it has gone up five times the level that the Reserve Bank moved interest rates just this week. Interest rates are a pressure on small and family businesses …

We know how hard it is for them to save for their retirement. At the last election we didn’t support the abolition of negative gearing which Anthony Albanese supported.

We said it need today stay because so many small family business owners pay for their superannuation and their retirement by the investments they make out of their business over the course of their working life. We understand the needs of small and family businesses. Labor doesn’t have a plan to get their costs down, they have a magic pen or wand they can wander around like Harry Potter. You can’t run the economy like Harry Potter. You need responsible financial management.

Updated at 1.14am BST

12.50am BST

That has been an oft-repeated line from Scott Morrison and members of the Coalition rubbishing Anthony Albanese’s pledge to write a letter to the Fair Work Commission in support of aged care workers receiving a pay rise, if he won the election.

But that same line the government is using seems to imply that it doesn’t believe statements of support from the prime minister are influential. Which is very strange.

Updated at 1.08am BST

12.49am BST

'I don't have a magic pen,' Scott Morrison says

Q: You have talked about a strong economic outlook, do you support an increase in the national minimum wage above the rate of inflation, given you have the power to make recommendations to the Fair Work Commission?

Scott Morrison:

We have always believed the Fair Work Commission should make the decision independently of government, based on the evidence. That is why they were appointed for that purpose.

Q: You do have the power to make ... [submissions]

Morrison:

I don’t believe a have a magic pen that makes wages go up or prices go down. Anthony Albanese is walking around in this election pretending that he has some special magical powers to make wages go up and costs go down and you don’t.

As a prime minister, you don’t have that. I know I have been in the job. What you do is you run government policies that support employment in the economy that ensures unemployment comes down, which ensures that wages can rise and what we saw from the governor of the Reserve Bank this week, just this week, he has finally said, because that is what he has been looking for, that he is seeing wages start to increase.

The reason wages are increasing is because unemployment is coming down and the Reserve Bank governor says he believes that unemployment in Australia will fall to below 50-year lows of 3.5%.

That is an extraordinary arrangement. We have always taken the same position when it comes to the decisions of the Fair Work Commission. They make their decisions based on the best information they have and we provide that information to them to assist them with their decisions. We respect their decisions and we always have and we intend to continue to follow that responsible policy.

Updated at 1.07am BST

12.47am BST

Q: On the Solomon Islands, the prime minister Sogavare has come out and criticised Australia over the handling of the deal. You have always said Australia is the primary security partner of the Solomon Islands. Given all the comments that Sogavare has made, what does this say about Australia’s relations with the Pacific if this is how a key ally, a security ally is criticising Australia?

Scott Morrison:

It wasn’t I that said that, it was prime minister Sogavare who said that. They are his words. That is the stance of the Solomon Islands government. Australia is the primary security partner of the Solomons.

That is the statement of the policy of the prime minister of the Solomon Islands and that is why the Australian federal police, right now, are on the ground in Solomon Islands, ensuring peace and stability following the unrest in Solomon Islands when prime minister Sogavare called me and wrote to me and asked me for Australia’s support to deal with that very serious situation.

We had our police there and defence forces on the ground within 12 to 24 hours and we stabilised the situation and we restored peace and stability, just like Australians had previously done under the Ramsey initiative, done under the Howard government. We have demonstrated that in season and out of season and we will continue to do that as a great partner of the Solomon Islands and all of our Pacific family.

Updated at 1.06am BST

12.44am BST

Scott Morrison makes small business pitch in Parramatta

Scott Morrison is pushing his small business announcement – the government has pledged to see 400,000 new small businesses (net) over the next five years.

Much like the job pledge though, population and economic growth will lead to that happening, regardless of who wins the election.

Morrison:

Through the course of this pandemic, the tenacity, determination, strength and resilience of Australians small and family business owners has been remarkable.

Could you imagine what it was like for them just over two years ago, where everything they had worked for, family business, run for over 30 years and then confronted with the terrible nature of a global pandemic and the economy shutting down. Everything their family had worked for for over three decades, all being at risk.

Now two years later, here we are, the business continuing to go strong, investing, having invested in the upgrade of their facilities here with great confidence and optimism and hope for their future, including one of the latest of the third generation of the family here to join us only this morning.

Small and family businesses have really demonstrated the strength of Australia over the last two years, in particular, as we have come through this pandemic.

As a government we have been there with them from the very start, whether it was the cashflow boost, whether it was jobkeeper, or the ability to write off losses against tax already paid, or the instant asset write-off which has ensured all of the new equipment you have seen here being able to be written off in one year. The investment we have put into training and skills, keeping apprentices, all of these as we have gone through the pandemic, we have kept small and family businesses in business.

Not only that, we have supported them to be able to set themselves up for the future as we come out of this pandemic.

Updated at 1.05am BST

12.42am BST

Members of the National Tertiary Education Union have been told to change their online banking passwords after the union was the victim of a ransomware attack on Tuesday night.

In an email sent to members, general secretary Matthew McGowan said the union was not certain of the extent of the data breach and “the potential exists that your personal details may have been compromised”:

Your credit card and banking details are subject to a higher level of internal NTEU encryption and it may be that they will not be accessible to the hacker but in the interests of caution we are not assuming so.

At this stage the hacker has not indicated any intention to release the data to anyone other than NTEU. Nevertheless, we recommend that you change the passwords for your credit cards and online banking accounts as soon as possible and that you maintain a higher than normal level of vigilance for the time being. Out of caution we also advise you to check that no suspicious or fraudulent activity has taken place in relation to your banking and credit card accounts.

McGowan said the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner had been advised about the data breach, as required under law.

Updated at 1.03am BST

12.40am BST

Anthony Albanese was on the Nine network this morning, where he was asked about his habit of deferring to his shadow ministers to answer questions during press conferences.

Labor says it is part of the campaign to show people who will be leading it on the frontbench, as part of a government Albanese would lead, as well as showing how he would be more collaborative leader. Critics, including the Liberal party, claim it is because Albanese is not across the detail.

So there was this exchange this morning:

Q: The question is, though, you want to be the next prime minister. You want to run the country. Shouldn’t you be across your briefs?

Albanese:

I am, Ally. I am. Stop reading from the Liberal party notes that they send through to people all of the time, Ally. This is just an absurdity. Today – I tell you what my program is today – talking to yourself on the Today show, I then have radio interviews and then visiting the Smart Energy expo in Sydney. I then do a speech at ACI and take a whole series of questions from the business community ...

Q: Anthony, I am basing this on what I’ve seen this week, just watching your press conferences this week, Anthony Albanese.

Albanese:

Tonight I’m on Q+A for on hour.

Q: I saw you deflect two questions on Monday about wages, another on interest rates and on Tuesday about housing. A question to the shadow treasurer. A question to the shadow treasurer. A question to the Shadow Treasurer about the economy. But you want to be the prime minister. Shouldn’t you also know the answer?

Albanese:

I do, Ally. I do.

Q: I think your are problem is after the stumble week one when you did don’t the cash rate or unemployment rate, any time you do defer it suggests you don’t know.

Albanese:

No, Ally. That’s nonsense, Ally. Your viewers are smarter than that and your viewers know that I lead a team. I the captain. I’m proud of my team. None of mine are in witness protection. This prime minister can’t even say who the education minister is. You won’t see him anywhere near a school, anywhere near a Tafe, anywhere near a university and today, guess what, Ally, today at the ACI speech, Jim Chalmers will be there, Katy Gallagher will be there, Tanya Plibersek will be there, Jason Clare will be there. A whole lot of my team will be there to hear my speech and hear me take questions from the business community and, guess what, that shows what a team we are, Ally. ... There was a report the other day that said, “Albanese gives housing question to housing shadow minister” – whatever the headline was – and we all just had a chuckle and could not believe how, frankly, strange that spin was which came straight from the Liberal party headquarters.

Q: I feel when questions are put directly to you the Australian people expect you to be able to answer it.

Albanese:

You’re entitled to disagree, Ally, but we have a joint press conference which we did on the Central Coast. Guess what, Ally, we got questions about the Central Coast as well. The local members, or local potential members in Dr Gordon Reed, fantastic candidate for Robertson, ED doctor at Wyong hospital, he answered a question about local health.

Updated at 1.02am BST

12.30am BST

This is, by my count, the fifth time Scott Morrison has visited Parramatta this campaign.

The Liberals really, really want to win this seat from Labor and sense opportunity with the longtime MP Julie Owens retiring.

Scott Morrison is really taking election sweeteners to a new level today, campaigning at a local Lebanese bakery in the seat of Parramatta. #auspol #ausvotes pic.twitter.com/T67EX6CW36
— courtney gould (@heyycourtt) May 4, 2022

Updated at 12.34am BST

12.20am BST

Pre-poll opens on Monday.

The AEC says:

More than 500 early voting centres will be in operation across Australia during a two-week early voting period that starts on Monday.

The Australian Electoral Commission is today urging voters to plan their vote with Electoral Commissioner Tom Rogers outlining the range of COVID-19 safety measures in place.

Australian elections are in-person events – once every three years the country comes together in a transparent and secure environment to have their say,” Mr Rogers said.

If you can vote on election day then that’s what you should do. However, if your circumstances might prevent you from doing that then you need to think about the early voting options available, and vote according to your circumstances.

Australians have been living with COVID for more than two years now. For most people you’re visiting the shops regularly, attending events or taking public transport – voting centres will have more protections in place than most areas of society.”

Opening days and hours

On election day, polling places will once again be open from 8am to 6pm.

To allow people to assess and cater to their circumstances in the Covid environment, a number of early voting centres will be offering extended hours. Voting centre locations, their opening days and hours are available on the AEC website at aec.gov.au.

Updated at 12.22am BST

12.09am BST

Victoria reports 14 Covid deaths

Victoria has also released its daily report:

We thank everyone who got vaccinated and tested yesterday.

Our thoughts are with those in hospital, and the families of people who have lost their lives.

More data soon: https://t.co/OCCFTAtS1P #COVID19Vic #COVID19VicData pic.twitter.com/d1qcOIeCUF
— VicGovDH (@VicGovDH) May 4, 2022

Updated at 12.13am BST

12.06am BST

NSW reports 21 deaths, jump in Covid cases

The number of third doses being administered is not moving that fast in NSW:

COVID-19 update – Thursday 5 May 2022

In the 24-hour reporting period to 4pm yesterday:

- 96.2% of people aged 16+ have had one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine
- 94.8% of people aged 16+ have had two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine pic.twitter.com/uVNplK0AiQ
— NSW Health (@NSWHealth) May 4, 2022

Updated at 12.12am BST

11.50pm BST

Cost of living is biting but it’s not a new problem for a lot of people who have found finding somewhere to live increasingly impossible

If you’ve struggled with a dwindling and expensive rental market, or you just feel completely locked out of home ownership, Guardian Australia’s daily news podcast Full Story wants to hear from you.

Call (02) 8076 8550 to leave a voicemail and tell us your story about the housing crisis and it may be featured in an episode.

Updated at 12.02am BST

11.48pm BST

In that exchange, Stuart Robert said he had been acting as the education minister for a year. But Alan Tudge didn’t announce he was stepping down until 2 December last year.

Perhaps the last five months have just felt like a year for Robert.

11.42pm BST

Yesterday the government announced $40m to “raise school standards”.

Stuart Robert, the acting education minister, was sent out to sell the policy pledge, as education minister Alan Tudge, who Scott Morrison confirmed is still in cabinet, has stepped aside from his portfolio.

On News Breakfast, Lisa Millar pressed Robert was pressed on why Tudge wasn’t making the announcement, considering Morrison said on Wednesday that Tudge would be his education minister in a re-elected government.

Q: Why isn’t the education minister, Alan Tudge, making this announcement today?

Robert:

I’m the acting education minister, and have been for almost 12 months. So I’ve got full authority in terms of running the education portfolio, as well as skills and workplace and the other things that I do.

Q: So where is Alan Tudge?

Robert:

I suggest in his electorate. I don’t know where he is. I tend not to keep track of my colleagues’ whereabouts.

Q: Well, he is a frontbencher and the prime minister has said that he’s welcome back in cabinet, but he’s sitting on an electorate with a 10% margin. So he would normally be out campaigning elsewhere, but he’s not in this, because of the allegations that have sat over him and this question about the $500,000 payment. When are taxpayers going to get the right to know what when on in his ministerial office and why this $500,000 payment has been made to one of his staffers?

Robert:

I’m not across those issues so, unfortunately, I can’t give you any degree of answer. They’re issues that are dealt with by the Department of Finance, very much at arm’s length from anyone. Certainly arm’s length from me. My responsibility as required by the prime minister as the acting education minister and the acting minister for youth, is to use all of those resourcing and requirement and continue to act in the best interests of the people of Australia, which I’ve been doing with my state and territory colleagues. That’s why just before the election, of course, we signed off on the national curriculum, which was a landmark piece of work that we did together as education ministers right across the country.

Q: Don’t you think, given that Alan Tudge’s [former staffer] Rachelle Miller has released the government of any responsibility when it comes to the confidentiality over the legal claim, that it is right for taxpayers to did why that money was paid and what’s behind it?

Robert:

Again, Lisa, I’m just not across those issues in any detail at all.

Q: Minister, I’m not sure that that would swing with our viewers, suggesting that you’re not aware or not across it, given that it has filled headlines and column pages for months.

Robert:

I’m still not across what the details are. I’m not across what the legalities are.

Q: Do you think that taxpayers have a right to know? OK, but if you don’t know the details, do you think that taxpayers have a right to know? It’s $500,000. Something went on in a minister’s office and $500,000 gets paid out?

Robert:

Again, I’m not going to comment on things that I’m just not across. I don’t think that the Australian people expect the acting education minister to wade into every issue, especially issues that I’m simply not briefed on. My brief is to ensure that we can get the best possible curriculum and the best possible teacher education quality out of our universities, and that’s exactly what we’re doing.

Updated at 11.53pm BST

11.35pm BST

Daniel Hurst has this exclusive, which helps to show what direction Labor is taking for its foreign policy plans:

Labor will appoint an ambassador for human rights if it wins the federal election, pledging to restore Australia’s leadership on the world stage and draw a line under Scott Morrison’s “negative globalism”.

Weeks after it emerged the Australian Human Rights Commission risks having its global accreditation downgraded, Labor also promised to “defend” the institution with a return to merit-based appointments.

The policy to be outlined on Thursday includes the appointment of a dedicated ambassador for human rights to “advance the rights and protections for people living with a disability, ethnic and religious minorities, and LGBTIQ+ individuals”.

Updated at 11.37pm BST

11.11pm BST

Scott Morrison is continuing his “I know you don’t like me, but at least I don’t lead the Labor party” pitch to voters.

Could it work? Of course.

"You don't get every call right and I've been pretty open and honest about that"

Prime Minister @ScottMorrisonMP says the election "is not a popularity contest, it's about who can best lead Australia" over the next three years. pic.twitter.com/Vsdvc7rKev
— Sunrise (@sunriseon7) May 4, 2022

Updated at 11.31pm BST

11.09pm BST

Lambie says voters giving PM 'no other choice' on federal Icac

Tasmanian senator Jacqui Lambie says Scott Morrison needs to “get his boots on” and hear what people on the ground are saying about a federal integrity commission – they want one:

They want accountability and they want politicians held accountable and so they should – the amount of money that we’re on and the job that we’re supposed to be doing is the highest office in the nation. So we should be on watching if the Australian people out there have no trust in us.

We’ve got to do something and he’s got no other choice and it’s about time we were looked at under the same situation as anybody else that’s in a normal workplace and it needs to be done. I want that trust installed back around this country. And the only way to do it is by an Icac and having political police on the beat. And that’s what we need.

We need to be held accountable, not just by the newspapers and journalists, but we need to be accountable. If you’ve got nothing to hide, just like any other normal person would have to go to a court and you go and explain yourself in front of a judge or a jury. That’s what we do.

That’s normal behaviour. But it seems politicians don’t have to, don’t have to raise themselves to that standard. Well, guess what? It’s about bloody time they did. And they’ve got no choice because there’s no trust left. And they have to, it’s as simple as that.

Updated at 11.30pm BST

11.00pm BST

Hung parliament 'probably better for democracy': Jacqui Lambie says

Jacqui Lambie says she also believes a hung parliament would deliver better outcomes for Australia:

I think having a hung parliament is probably better for democracy when you’ve got to try and push things through, especially bills and legislation from my experience in the Senate, and you’ve got that balance of power, you try and make them better. That’s what you do. You don’t worry about sort of doing the deals. What you do is make those bills and legislation better. That doesn’t just suit your own state but suits the whole nation without any conflicts of interest.

Updated at 11.24pm BST

10.55pm BST

Jacqui Lambie is now speaking to the same program and is asked about how voters in Tasmania are feeling:

So what I will say is this, three years ago when we were six or eight weeks out when we thought Bill Shorten might win, and then he started to wean off in the end – I can tell you now, that is not happening this time to Anthony Albanese. As a matter of fact, I think he’s actually picked up on a whole new level ahead of Morrison down here on Tassie and I think that has got a lot to do with the cost of living.

Updated at 10.59pm BST

10.52pm BST

Simon Birmingham is asked about the “scare” campaign surrounding voting for independents, after John Howard said electing even one teal independent candidate would “destroy” the Liberal government.

Birmingham is more measured (but not by much):

We want voters in those electorates as we do in every electorate to think carefully about the choice … people should think about the fact that the so-called teal independents, often have a history of involvement in the Labor party, are refusing to say who they would support to form government and, if they got elected, would likely be part of a very unstable and risky Labor-Greens independent alliance that would see higher rates of spending, higher pressure on interest rates and higher taxes.

Updated at 10.58pm BST

10.45pm BST

Simon Birmingham is on ABC radio RN, speaking about the government’s pledge to help create 400,000 small businesses over the next five years.

He says that’s a net figure but can’t say how many will close.

Patricia Karvelas says she has some numbers:

Nearly 365,000 small businesses were launched in 2020 2021 alone – 277,000 were closed though.

So is 400,000 over five years that ambitious?

Birmingham says it’s the net figure. So how many will close in those five years?

I don’t have on the top of my head the ins and outs on a year-by-year basis.

Updated at 10.50pm BST

10.40pm BST

Good morning

We have made it to day 25.

With today, there are about 17 days left.

If you break it down into coffees, that’s about 12,457. It would be irresponsible to break that down into alcoholic drinks.

Penny Wong has been back in front of the cameras making sure everyone remembered the handling of the Solomon Islands and the Pacific under Scott Morrison’s watch. She told ABC TV:

Quite a lot of the way in which prime minister – Mr Morrison – has dealt with this issue has surprised me. I think Australians have been surprised.

We know that we were warned about this. Australia was warned about this in August last year and, despite that and a number of other warning signs, I don’t see – I don’t think Australians see at a political level, actions being taken that reflects the imperative for Australia to continue to work to be the partner of choice. This is not an optional extra, this is fundamental to our security.

Labor is not planning on letting that drop but it’s cost of living that remains the main focus. Morrison has started the morning with the commercial TV breakfast shows because that’s who he needs to win. He’s focused on the “international pressures” message as well as the “economic shield” he says the government provided, rounding it off with a “who do you trust?” message.

We’re going to be hearing this for 17 more days. Make it about 14,345 coffees.

We’ll bring you all the day’s events as they happen. It looks as though it will be a busy morning so let’s jump straight in.

Updated at 10.42pm BST

Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.

Already a member? Sign in here