Health News at Your Fingertips

Blake Sharp-Wiggins was in the senate and saw this:

Leaving the circular debate behind, let’s have a look at how Mike Bowers saw the chamber:

The Speaker’s friends and family came to rah rah him on:

The PM’s friends and family came by to rah rah him on

Anthony Albanese arrived in the chamber

Peter Dutton took his new spot in the chamber

The new respectful parliament

Sussan Ley steps in after Tony Burke’s rebuttal to Peter Dutton and says he was a “very shouty minister, a long way away from the ‘family friendly’ [behaviour] he promised this morning”.

Ley says she wants to know “who is protecting the women” on construction worksites.

Josh Butler covered this off this morning, but AAP have some more detail on Pauline Hanson’s latest stunt in the upper house:

Indigenous Greens senator Lidia Thorpe has criticised Senator Pauline Hanson as “disrespectful” for storming out of the Senate chamber during the opening acknowledgement of country.

“Day two of the 47th parliament and racism has reared its ugly head,” Thorpe wrote on Twitter.

“Pauline Hanson disrespectfully stormed out of the acknowledgement of country in the Senate, refusing to acknowledge ‘those people’. You want to make parliament safe? Get rid of racism.”

Labor senator Jenny McAllister said on Tuesday the acknowledgement of country was “a courtesy … that brings people together”.

“Everyone has to make their own decision about how they behave in this place and what they bring to this place – it’s up to Pauline Hanson to make her own decisions about,” she told the ABC.

“But I am really clear about my position. Acknowledging country and acknowledging traditional owners is the right thing to do.”

Hanson angrily left the Senate chamber during the acknowledgement of country after dismissing its validity. She interjected: “No, I won’t and never will.”

The One Nation senator later told newswire AAP she could not accept the welcome to country or a proposal, to be moved later in the day, that would raise the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags in the Senate chamber.

“I’ve been feeling this way for a long time. I have called from the first day for equality for all Australians. I see this as divisive.”

Hanson said if anyone needed acknowledgement it was “our people that have fought for this country – people who have sacrificed their lives”.

She added:

It’s not for senators to decide whether the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags are flown in this chamber. I suggest that (we) actually allow the people of Australia to vote whether they want those flags flown.

Josh Taylor

NBN Co has said it will withdraw a controversial proposal for price hikes proposed under the former government, after the new ministers outlined new expectations for the company.

The Special Access Undertaking sets how NBN wholesale prices are regulated, and in March this year, NBN Co had proposed a system which would have allowed the government-owned company to increase prices by inflation + 3%.

Retail internet service providers had warned the proposed change would lead to the cheapest NBN plan doubling in costover the next decade.

The communications minister Michelle Rowland and the finance minister, Katy Gallagher, wrote to NBN and said the current proposal was not acceptable.

The pair said the variation proposed was “underpinned by unrealistic revenue expectations and reflected a view to privatisation”.

NBN Co was told the new government intends to keep NBN Co in public ownership for the foreseeable future.

NBN Co said today it would ask the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, which set the framework, to withdraw the submission.

A new discussion paper will be prepared to be released early next month, with the process expected to be finalised early in 2023.

NBN Co CEO Stephen Rue said:

The policy landscape has changed since we submitted our original proposal. Therefore, we are pleased to be able to withdraw our earlier submission and submit a revised proposal that takes this into account. The nbn underpins Australia’s global competitiveness in the digital economy so it is imperative that we get this right.

Prime minister Anthony Albanese met with new United States ambassador Caroline Kennedy in Parliament House today. Kennedy, who was sworn in on Monday, is considered US political royalty.

Her father was former US president John F Kennedy. According to a statement:

The ambassador passed on the best wishes of president [Joe] Biden and the White House’s optimism about the next chapter in bilateral relations.It was a warm conversation covering the strength of the alliance, new possibilities for Australia-US cooperation including on climate, and developments in the Indo-Pacific region.The prime minister briefed the ambassador on the importance of the Uluru Statement and the Parliament’s work towards a Voice to Parliament – an area of special interest to Ambassador Kennedy.Kennedy will travel to Solomon Islands next week.

Peter Dutton leads the matter of public importance, which is on….the CFMEU and the abolishment of the ABCC.

He tries to tie it to the rising cost of living – as in, on a day with the highest inflation since 2001, rising energy costs, etc “it is telling” that one of Labor’s first acts is to abolish the ABCC.

But with all of those cost of living increases, the opposition spent most of that question time asking about a statutory body most outside of this building have not heard about, nor care about.

The opposition is in a bit of a tight spot – the inflation, after all, happened on their watch. But still, given the impact on the public, you would think that there would be more than one question on price impacts.

And with that, question time ends.

Shayne Neumann to Clare O’Neil:

My question as to the Minister for home affairs. Can the Minister update the house on the findings of the 951 report and its implications?

(Alan Tudge seems to throw out a sledge about Neumann being on the backbench, from the opposition shadow bench)

O’Neil (there are a lot of interjections here, so bear with me):

I thank the member for Blair and all of us would acknowledge this as a person who comes to work every day and acts with the utmost of integrity and so it is no surprise to get the question from him today.

Speaker, last week the Australian government made the decision to release the report written by secretary Mike Pezzullo into the disgraceful action of the former government to release information about about arrival on election day on the 21 May. This was the former government sabotaging protocols that protect operation sovereign borders and the people in uniform who do dangerous and difficult work.

One of the truly outrageous things is out lies that the former Minister of home affairs to release this information while the operation was on foot.

This was without precedent in the history of Operation Sovereign Borders and it meant an operation undertaken by Border Force and a defence force officials was undermined by the Shadow Minister who now sits opposite me.

The report also details the fact that despite the fact that the Prime Minister at the time asked the Minister for home affairs to release the statement herself, she chose not to do that, instead she put it on a defence force official who wears uniform for our country to make the statement for her and that was an act of cowardice.

If you are going to politicise this operation, you do it yourself and you put your name to the work that you do. Shadow Minister had an opportunity…

Luke Howarth tries to make a point of order on how O’Neil reflected on the shadow minister (Karen Andrews) and Tony Burke responds:

To the point of order Mr Speaker because of the standing order on reflection for members is important but it does not extend to explaining what a Member in fact did. If the actions are taken to be, well, that is terrible the person did that and a lot of conclusions are drawn, that is on the Member. The standing order is not there to protect Member from the accurate description of what they did

Paul Fletcher responds:

Mr Speaker the relevant standing order says all imputation of improper notice to members and personal reflection on other members shall be considered highly disorderly and so it should be withdrawn.

Milton Dick (after telling Chris Bowen off for interjecting)

Listening to the Minister carefully, she did not reflect directly on the former Minister. Standing order 90 is important. She was referring to the situation. She did not refer directly to the Minister but if she did, I would and for standing order 90. Order! The Member for Petrie! Order! It is close enough. Order. I … intend to enforce the standing orders and particularly standing order 90. In this case, the Minister did not reflect directly on the Member. I will listen carefully to her and to all members to ensure that standing order is in force. I called the Minister.

Peter Dutton:

Mr Speaker, with all due respect to you, I want to take you up on the point of your recollection of what was a clear statement by the Minister and I hope she is able to step up and clarify for you but it was in fact a direct reflection on the Shadow Minister. In her statement, the Minister made a comment directly in relation to the Shadow Minister about actions that she took… That was a direct reflection on the Shadow Minister.

O’Neil:

I was reflecting on the conduct of the Member and those are two different things.

…I really invite those opposites to consider this, if you do not want to be accused of acts of cowardice,…

Paul Fletcher tries to have another point of order and is sat down.

O’Neil:

I would like to say to those opposites, if you do not want to be accused of acts of cowardice and breaching your duty and the trust you owe to the Australian people, don’t do it.

Don’t do what is in this report.

I do not need to make it up, we have a report on the public record that outlines the disgraceful conduct of the former government. She has an to defend herself. Any of us accuse of these things would come forward and apologise but that is not what we heard. We had a denial that the public service was subverted. Wrong, it is in the report. I want to close by saying this, we should not become immune to these things in our democracy.

This was a disgraceful, unprecedented act that should never have happened and those opposites stand condemned doing it.

Greens leader asks treasurer about stage three tax cuts

Adam Bandt to Jim Chalmers:

I congratulate the prime minister and the government on the election. Stage three tax cuts will cost the public over $220bn and give billionaires a $9,000 a year handout at the taxpayer expense. With inflation rising and the budget under pressure, will you drop these and put it into dental and Medicare instead to help relieve the cost of living pressures on everyday people?

Chalmers:

I thank the member for Melbourne and congratulate him on his re-election and [on] the election of his colleagues on the crossbench as well. As the member for Melbourne knows, the legislated tax cuts are already in the budget and they do not come in for a couple of years and we said we do not intend to change that.

Our position is on that as is, respectfully your position is known on that as well. We also should acknowledge that when it comes to those stage three tax cuts, if your idea was to prevail it would not do anything about the inflation challenges.

Yes, we have budget challenges right now. The most pressing thing to focus on is high and rising inflation, falling real wages, and some of our choices have been constrained. So our priority, when it comes to tax reform – first of all, the only legislation that I have introduced from this place in the first day is to make electric vehicles cheaper, and we are proud of that, working closely with the minister for climate change. But beyond that, repairing the budget, the member knows our focus is on making multinationals pay their fair share of tax as well as measures on tax compliance and making sure the foreign investment regime retains some money to the budget as well. That is our priority when it comes to taxes and charges and repairing the budget.

More broadly to budget repair, you would be familiar, as is the whole house, particularly the member for Hume would know this, as we inherited a lot of waste in the budget and frauds that we are going through those rorts advice to find other alternatives, like investment in skills, the skills minister was talking about before, like investment in childcare that the childcare minister was talking about.

We talk about taking unproductive, politically motivated spending, for which the member for Hume is the poster child, and directing it to more productive spending in the budget that begins cutting back on lots of waste and includes making sure we are investing on the things that can get the economy growing the right way.

Budget repair, responsible investment is part of that and the onus is on the government to do what we can to repair the budget. We have had a decade of rorts and waste, which has led to $1tn of debt without enough to show for it, so we want to make sure every dollar which is borrowed, which now costs more to service, is actually delivering a dividend for the Australian people.

PM asked about federal court view of CFMEU case

Melissa Price to Anthony Albanese:

Is the prime minister aware that senior judges at the federal court [described] CFMEU behaviour as notorious, an embarrassment to the trade union movement? Which displays an outrageous disregard for Australian industrial norms? Given the minister’s decision to abolish the dedicated industry watchdog, would this make a bad situation worse and increase the cost of new schools and hospitals?

Albanese:

I thank the member for her question, and I am asked about the federal court and the CFMEU and the ABCC. This is what the federal court did in 2017 that I am aware of. A blast of the ABCC as a waste of time and taxpayer public money prosecuting two CFMEU officials for, to quote from a federal court decision, having a cup of tea with a mate.

Having a cup of tea with a mate. And this is what Justice North described … he described as a minuscule insignificant affair. And then he said this is all external forces that are beating up what is just a really ordinary situation that amounts to virtually nothing. That is the federal court’s ruling in the decision.

There are a lot of interjections and points of order, which are rejected.

Albanese:

It is just extraordinary. I can’t be more specific. Justice North went on to say, when the ABCC was talking about, use public resources to bring the bar down to this level, it really calls into question the exercise of the discretion to proceed. That is what they had to say at that time. The federal court has also dismissed the ABCC for its prosecutions labelling them unnecessarily inflammatory and another quote, conducted as a blood sport. This is what the federal court had to say about these actions that the member raised, and I thank you very much for her question.

Anne Aly outlines Labor’s childcare reform plans

Anne Aly is asked about the childcare reforms and says:

May I take this opportunity to pay heed to my predecessor in this space, the minister for social services (Amanda Rishworth), when as the shadow minister for the arts was architect of Labor’s plan, and who continues to be a fierce advocate of early childhood education.

On this side of the chamber, we know that childcare costs are eating a bigger and bigger hole in the household budgets, and putting more financial strain on families.

Almost 73,000 families are locked out of the childcare system because it is unaffordable. That means that children are missing out on important early learning, and parents, and in most cases mothers, who are the primary caregivers are not able to work the hours they want, they are not able to progress their careers and they are not able to contribute to the household finances in the ways in which they would like to.

Labor’s cheaper childcare plan will make early childhood education more affordable for 1.26 million families by increasing our childcare subsidy rate. A big part of that is a plan for the ACCC to design a price regulation mechanism that will drive down out-of-pocket costs for families. We have committed to a comprehensive review of the childcare sector through the Productivity Commission, with the aim of implementing a universal 90% childcare subsidy for all families.

These reforms aren’t just about the economy. They are also about increased workforce participation. They are about women being able to go back to work in the capacity in which they want to go back to work and participate in the workforce. It means that early childhood education educators are valued for their vital work, but importantly, these reforms are about ensuring all children have access to quality, affordable early learning, investing in their future and in ours.

Paul Fletcher to Brendan O’Connor:

I ask the minister inform the house as to whether he has met with any CFMEU officials regarding the abolition of the construction watchdog?

O’Connor:

Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I thank the honourable member for his question. And before I answer the question, I congratulate you, Mr Speaker, on your elevation to office, a well-deserved result in the election yesterday.

Can I indicate to the house that I have not spoken to any official of the CFMEU in relation to this matter that has been asked of me by the honourable member.

BasicsCard is cruel, unnecessary and ineffective, Antipoverty Centre says

The Antipoverty Centre’s Jay Coonan says continuing the BasicsCard is continuing to punish those living in poverty:

It is galling for them to have misled the public about their intention to “abolish” cashless welfare, because they haven’t. Keeping the BasicsCard is cruel, unnecessary and ineffective. It is worse when the prime minister uses his mother’s experience of social security for political gain, only to punish people like this.

This abhorrent decision leaves the door open to expand income control further under the guise of “community consultations” – when it’s never the voices of people subjected to the card who are consulted. It was a Labor government that expanded cashless welfare last time they were in government and we fear it will be a Labor government who expands it again.

The minister’s office has been contacted for comment.

Amanda Rishworth is asked a dixer about pensioners being able to relax about being put on the Indue card (which was not the previous government’s policy, but was an attack line Labor prosecuted during the campaign).

Rishworth says it will never happen under Labor (it was not going to happen, as a wider policy, under the Coalition either).

Rishworth goes on:

Earlier today, I introduced legislation to start the task of dismantling the Coalition’s cashless debit card experiment, and I want to reassure the member for Bruce that seniors will no longer have to worry that their pension will be linked to the card because no one in this country will have to worry about it because we are getting rid of it and we are ending the experiment of privatised welfare in this country*.

Of course, the cashless debit card was an ideological obsession by the former Coalition government. It was imposed on communities and rolling out, rolling out, rolling out and, of course, it was completely imposing on communities that did not want it and did not like it and when the evidence came out that it was not working, there was no evidence to support it, there were pleas from communities and what do they do? They just kept rolling it out.

They put ideology before evidence, arrogance before consultation. This was a defining feature of the former Morrison government. Well, that is not what will happen under this government. The prime minister during the election campaign said that this would be a priority, to get rid of the cashless debit card and we’re getting on with the job.

*But. There is still no word on what is happening to the BasicsCard. The BasicsCard is different to the cashless welfare card but it is one of the income management tools.

The APH library describes the card as:

The BasicsCard was introduced to support the [Coalition] government’s income management initiatives. Various forms of income management operate in locations around Australia including the Northern Territory, Cape York, the Kimberley, Perth, Playford, Shepparton, Bankstown, Logan, Rockhampton and a number of remote Indigenous communities.

The BasicsCard is a PIN protected magnetic stripe card that allows income support recipients to spend their payments at approved businesses. The card works on the Eftpos system. Cardholders cannot use the card to withdraw cash from automatic teller machines or Eftpos terminals or to buy alcohol, tobacco, pornography or gambling products.

Only some retailers and service providers are approved to accept the BasicsCard. To get approval, a business must agree to accept a list of obligations that include not allowing people to use the card to buy excluded goods, gift cards or cash.

A common complaint from cardholders in some income management trial sites is that many retailers and service providers do not accept the BasicsCard. For example, Aldi, Bunnings, Officeworks and some government agencies.

There has been no word on whether Labor plans on scrapping this income management card, which a lot of people have been placed on.

Milton Dick:

The member for Longman, I just ask the house if the minister could be heard in silence and you interjected straight away. Could we cease interjections at least until the minister starts talking?

Independent Andrew Wilkie asks about Hecs hike

There is another question from the crossbench.

Andrew Wilkie:

Minister, the recent 650% [indexation rate rise] in Hecs is unreasonable, especially coming as it does so soon after the previous government’s reduction of the compulsory [repayment threshold]. Education was too expensive already. Will you review the indexation rate and bring relief to the 2.9 million Australians lumbered with Hecs?

Jason Clare:

The power and importance of education – I thank the member for Clark, he knows very well, as well as do you, Mr Speaker. And I congratulate you on your election, and I note the comments you made yesterday about the parliament in schools program, and I look forward to working with you on that.

Last year, the indexation rate was 5.6, this year it is 3.9 calculated based on CPI over the last two years. The member for Clark mentioned the cost of living and in that regard it is important to remember that payments are set as a set percentage of your income. In other words, they do not go up unless your salary does.

The issue of affordability is an important one, that said, and it will be one of the things that will be looked at by the government as part of the university accord process. It is important to make this point, Mr Speaker, when Hecs was first introduced in 1989, less than 8% of Australians had university degrees.

That now stands at about 33%. Hecs is largely responsible for that. Amongst younger Australians, the percentage is even higher, more than 43% of younger Australians have a university degree. But that figure hides another fact – that is the fact that kids from poorer families are less likely to go to preschool, less likely to finish high school and are less likely to get a university degree.

Where you live also matters. My friends on both sides of the House of Representatives in regional areas will know this. About 48% of young people in our major cities have university degrees but the percentage in regional Australia is about 20%, and for our Indigenous brothers and sisters that percentage is even lower, something like less than 10% of Indigenous Australians have a university degree.

We have got to do something about that. I do not want this to be a country where your opportunities in life depend on your postcode, your parents or the colour of your skin.

Soon I will be announcing a group of eminent Australians will lead that work and look at everything from low economic background, regional Australians, but also transparency, regulations and employment conditions, and also the issue that you have raised, the issue of affordability.