This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen
on .
It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
Labor attacks Turnbull's energy policy inconsistency – question time live
Labor attacks Turnbull's energy policy inconsistency – question time live
(35 minutes later)
On Ged Kearney’s question to the “current prime minister” Tony Smith had this to say:
.@LilyDAmbrosioMP on today's events: "I'm not sure Malcolm Turnbull knows what the NEG is anymore, or if it still exists" @AmyRemeikis #auspol #NEG
I listened to the member for Batman and her question at the beginning had an inclusion, or a lead in, with respect to the question to the Prime Minister. I’m going to make it very clear having reflected through the answer that I’m not going to allow that to occur. If members are incapable of simply asking the question to the Prime Minister or minister without adding in any other words, I’m going to sit them down, and I won’t be offering a chance to rephrase the question.”
Back in Queensland, LNP president Gary Spence has been questioned on what he has been saying to MPs - and whether he has been telling the Queenslanders to withdraw their support (he was doorstopped by Queensland journalists as he left the LNP party room meeting - Queensland parliament meets tomorrow)
So that is a ‘no’ to questions for the “current” PM then.
“You are asking me to talk about private conversations with MPs. A party president has private conversations with Members of Parliament all the time,” he said.
A new week and Christopher Pyne has written a dixer for himself which doesn’t involve sledging unions showing where every modicum of self control in the Liberal party has gone lately (hint - it’s not in the party room)
“I think everything that needs to be said has been said today . I haven’t got anything further to add.”
Ged Kearney with a question for the “current prime minister”.
As for whether Peter Dutton would make a better prime minister:
Can the prime minister confirm that he has had five different signature energy policies, including two just today? He is planning on dumping his signature business handout, and his government is completely paralysed by infighting and chaos. Isn’t it the case that Australians are paying the price for the circus that this government and its policies have become?
“Everybody has their own view. My view is my view. The MPs and Senators choose the leader”.
Josh Frydenberg takes this one:
“She should have welcomed today’s announcements because they will lower power prices,” he says. Continuing the “driving power prices down” line.
“At the end of the day, at the end of the day, we know what is going on over there,” Frydenberg says.
The problem is, we all know what is going on, full stop.
It is going to be very, very hard for Malcolm Turnbull to escape this:
Turnbull says the dumping of his energy policy followed "consultation" ... more like political panic as he moves further and further to the lunar right #auspol #qt
Mark Butler to Malcolm Turnbull: (I skipped over a dixer where Josh Frydenberg was talking about Labor’s “mixed messages” because there is only so much irony one blog can take)
Over the past two years, the prime minister has asked Labor to support an emissions scheme, a clean energy target, the guarantee that went to the party room last Tuesday, another version announced on Saturday and another policy four hours ago. Which of these policies does the government currently support? Aren’t Australians paying the price of five years of this government focusing on itself in several policies to bring down power prices for Australian households?
Turnbull does his best to claim that the problem is Labor’s and its lack of policy direction, but judging by the faces of those behind him, not even the government can pretend to agree with that today.
We move on to Julie Bishop – which is the first time we have heard or seen Turnbull’s deputy all day.
Oh goody.
We have reached the “I know you are, you said you are, but what am I?” part of today.
Bill Shorten to Malcolm Turnbull:
Bill Shorten to Malcolm Turnbull:
“The prime minister has passionately advocated the three things in his public life. The republic, climate change and his big business tax cuts. Given the prime minister has abandoned the republic, abandoned action on climate change, will he now rule out abandoning his centrepiece big business tax cut or is it the case that whenever it comes to a choice between his principles and his job, this prime minister stands for nothing at all?”
Given that the Prime Minister has previously advised the Parliament that no legislation to lower energy prices will proceed to the Parliament unless all 76 members of the government of the House of Representatives agree, why do Australians have to wait to get lower power prices because of the disunity in the Prime Minister’s government?
Turnbull:
Turnbull:
“The Labor party stands for higher personal income taxes, higher business and company taxes, posing multinational tax avoidance, placing greater childcare support for families, opposing funding the NDIS, wanting to keep secret and corrupting payments between employers and unions and opposing restoring the rule of law to the construction sector. Mr Speaker, the reality is the Labor party does not have one policy that will encourage one business to invest $1 or hire one employee.
“He can’t even, he’s not even capable of remembering what I said for five minutes between my answer and his question. Mr Speaker, Mr Speaker, it is clear that we have a majority of one in this house, and we are in a minority in the Senate. Yet, despite many people’s questioning whether we would be able to deliver in this Parliament, we have delivered one massive reform after another. The largest personal income tax cuts in 20 years. We have delivered lower taxes for small and medium family businesses. We have delivered billions of dollars going into Medicare and health and the PBS. We have record spending on infrastructure, and Mr Speaker we have been able to do what the Leader of the Opposition said would be unthinkable, we actually stood up for Australian workers and we got the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreed. Mr Speaker, my government has delivered one big reform after another, again and again. It has been said that we could not get legislation through the Senate, again it has been said we have a small minority in the house, and of course Mr Speaker the numbers are what they are, but we have delivered, and the runs on the board, and they are of record jobs growth last year, 3.1% GDP growth, energy prices starting to turn in the right direction, downwards. And Mr Speaker, tax cuts for hard-working middle incomeAustralians this year voted against by the Labor party.”
“Now, by contrast, what we have done is we have stood up for businesses and we have seen the strongest jobs growth last year … because we are supporting business, and we are standing up for hard-working Australian families and giving them at break this year and a longer term reform that will see 94% of Australians relieved from the curse of bracket creep paying no more than 32.5 cents on any extra dollar they earn.
A list of achievements - but what do you think people are going to remember?
“Mr Speaker, the honorable member talks about climate change. Well, we are taking real action on climate change, we are. [Labor laughs]
Probably time to trot this gem out again:
“What about the leader, the deputy prime minister mentions Snowy Hydro 2.0? That is the largest pumped hydro project in the southern hemisphere. We got it started, we have got it under way. Labor was able to deliver one policy after another that reduced the reliability of electricity networks and increase their cost. We are delivering the largest renewable energy project in Australia’s since Snowy Hydro 1.0. That is our commitment. Committed to a responsible approach to the environment, cheap electricity prices and a strong economy.”
WHO IS IT, WHICH ONE IS IT, WHO IS THE PRIME MINISTER? Labor MP Jenny Macklin during #wherestony on Tuesday. pic.twitter.com/uJYOgZH1fz
In between question time and now, I had A LOT of chats with government MPs and Queensland campaign types, and they all seem to feel the pressure is off Malcolm Turnbull.
Bill Shorten to Malcolm Turnbull:
I received almost an hour of “changing prime ministers would be insanity” type rants. But that doesn’t mean it won’t happen. Just that for now, the party is feeling like the solution would be worse than the symptoms.
I refer to thePrime Minister’s answer in which he said that his government would not introduce legislation unless it could be carried on its own numbers. Given that the Prime Minister has a majority of one, doesn’t every member of his backbench, including the former Prime Minister, now have the same power over government policy as the Prime Minister himself?
Interestingly, most of those I just spoke to seem to think that heading into opposition might actually “help us get our shit together”.
“Labor was a mess, but they’ve been pretty united and focused for six years now – and I don’t think you would see them do what we’ve been doing. Maybe we need some time to reflect to sort that out for ourselves,” one said.
Michael McCormack: still looking for a QT personality.
Even after everything.
Which means – this is it. This, what he has landed on lately, is what we get from our deputy prime minister. Reading his answers like he’s addressing a year 9 debate team.
We take a step away from the Neg (RIP) and leadership for a moment for the crossbench question. Cathy McGowan has it today and it is on welfare:
“Australians want to know that the social safety net is there to catch and look after them as they engage with workforce or further study. It is not a punishment. Minister, will you support the establishment of this commission to ensure that people living on government payments have a dignified standard of living?”
Dan Tehan:
He starts by talking about the success of the government to get people off unemployment benefits and the cashless welfare card. He also talks about how the pension for couples has gone up by $150. But he doesn’t answer the question.
McGowan goes to get up and bring him up on a point of order, but points out that she believes “the answer has rambled to its end”.
The chamber laughs - it is a nice bit of levity in a pretty tense day in that place.
Tayna Plibersek to Malcolm Turnbull:
Is legislating the government’s energy policy and issues central to government policy? Is it of vital importance?
There are “ooooohhhhhs” from the chamber. I assume because it is an actual question.
Turnbull:
Turnbull:
“What is vital is getting energy prices down. That is what Australians want us to do. I would have thought the deputy leader of the opposition would understand that we need to ensure that the rapid rise in energy prices way above the rate of inflation, has gone on for too long. We have taken strong measures to bring it down, it is starting to come down, and we have to do more. So, what we are doing is using the recommendations from the ACCC to ensure that we have the tools to make the big retailers, the big energy companies, serve their customers, and deliver for them. That is our permit it. Cheaper electricity.”
“It is self-evident that in the House of Representatives with a government with a majority of one, individual members who choose not to vote in accordance with the decisions of the majority of the party room, have the ability to prevent legislation being carried. That is the reality, the practical reality of the situation. And that is why, since the party meeting last week, we have been engaging with members to discuss their concerns and ensure that we can deliver the support for the government’s policies on the floor of the house.”
Nola Marino has sent out a reminder to all Liberal party members about the party room meeting tomorrow. I kid you not. How on earth would ANYONE in the Liberal party forget about that?
So while Julia Gillard managed to pass legislation through negotiating with the crossbench, Malcolm Turnbull can not negotiate with his own party room.
This is the second “alternative” policy dixer – looks like Christopher Pyne is repeating himself today.
There are not a lot of other take aways from today.
Not even Scott Morrison seems himself today. Labor on the other hand, are having a great time.
John McVeigh gives the next dixer on drought, talking about everything the government is doing - except for a long-term responsible climate change plan, of course.
Malcolm Turnbull:
I have to hand it to the leader of the opposition. He was able to restrain his smirk into halfway through that question. I have never heard a less convincing advocate for bipartisanship than the leader of the opposition. Mr Speaker, he is all politics and no policy. The simple fact is, what we have got our measures that will bring down electricity prices by hundreds of dollars. Strong measures. Strong measures and measures that are working already. All Labor has is a ragbag of measures that have been proven to fail, unsustainable renewable targets, unnecessary renewable targets, unsustainable emissions abatement targets. All of that has demonstrated to put up higher prices, to put up higher prices and undermine our competitiveness. If Labor was serious about energy policy they would be supporting policies based on economics and engineering, that is what we are doing and that is why we are seeing lower prices and we have more to come.
Bill Shorten to Malcolm Turnbull:
Bill Shorten to Malcolm Turnbull:
When will the prime minister provide Labor with a copy of the legislation for today’s version of its energy policy, and will the prime minister work with Labor on a constructive bipartisan basis to reduce pollution, increase renewables, and deliver lower power prices for Australian families?
Given his last answer, can apply minister confirmed that he is unwilling to talk to Labor about energy price legislation until he has the consent of the member for Warringah?
Turnbull starts with a reference to Shorten’s grin.
Turnbull:
Not surprisingly, it is all on this morning’s announcement.
On his question, his invitation to engage in bipartisanship is not very persuasive. The honorable member will understand that when dealing with issues of this kind, I will continue to confer with my colleagues.
.@ShaneRattenbury “The NEG is dead. It was hailed as a policy to address the ‘trilemma’ of prices, reliability and emissions reduction. Instead, Federal energy policy is being determined by the worst, climate change denying elements of the Liberal party” #auspol #NEG
We move on to Michael Keenan talking about the drought.
Tony Burke asks Malcolm Turnbull if each Coalition backbencher now has a veto over whether this legislation will be introduced. Turnbull replies:
The honorable member is not accurately reflecting the answer that I gave, but the fact is as I said this morning, and I said earlier, we seek to ensure that legislation that we introduce has the support of sufficient of our party room to enable it to be carried on our own numbers.
Turnbull may as well revert to one word answers at this stage
David Littleproud is again talking about the drought, this time in a dixer, and the tough conditions farmers are going through (all of Queensland is in drought, while most of NSW is also suffering, as well as parts of Victoria and WA) and again, this comes as the government removes emissions reductions from its energy legislation.
As Littleproud delivers his latest answer, bushfires continue to burn out of control. In winter. In August.
And meanwhile, the government is once again embracing coal.
The Neg (RIP) is also a topic of conversation in the other place, where Mathias Cormann is being even more succinct than usual.
Penny Wong: Less than a week ago, the prime minister said emissions reduction targets in his energy policy would be legislated. What happened?
Mathias Cormann: What happened is that clearly right now there is not the sufficient support for that particular part of the policy through the House of Representatives
I have never seen Malcolm Turnbull answer questions so succinctly. He gets three minutes a question and he is barely taking up one at the moment.
Bill Shorten to Malcolm Turnbull:
I refer to the prime minister’s last answer. Is the prime minister’s position that parliament will only be allowed to see the legislation if we agree to vote for it before we have seen it?
Turnbull:
I explained the circumstances in my press conference this morning. It is perfectly straightforward, we have a majority of one in this house, we need to have almost all of our party room to support legislation for the government to carry it on its own numbers. With respect to this matter, we are not in a position at this stage. We continue talking to our colleagues.
