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.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2018/nov/28/coalition-labor-morrison-dutton-shorten-australian-politics-live

The article has changed 17 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Frydenberg pulls out of G20 trip as Coalition tries to head off Peter Dutton referral – politics live Frydenberg pulls out of G20 trip as Coalition tries to head off Peter Dutton referral – politics live
(35 minutes later)
I am working on getting you those Senate speeches – they were very good. And needed. Jumping to state politics for just a moment – in news which will surprise exactly no one, Matthew Guy has resigned as the Victorian opposition leader.
Barry O’Sullivan, Fraser Anning and David Leyonjhelm walked out as Richard Di Natale was talking. Ahem, government MPs – might want to check your schedules
O’Sullivan lost Senate preselection and ends his term next year. It’s 4 minutes past 10am & no Governemnt MP has showed up for the Federaltion Chamber to start, denying a quorum. The Libs chaos is now undermining the functioning of parliament. pic.twitter.com/F4OPOtIRDL
Leyonjhelm is most likely going to the NSW upper chamber. Richard Di Natale:
There is as much chance of me turning into Scarlett Johansson as there is of Anning returning to the Senate next year. It is not my intention to disrespect the Senate or its processes. I have great respect for this institution. It is one of the honours of my life to be standing here representing the people of my home state and leading the Australian Greens. It is a privilege and an honour to do it, and I reflect on that every day.
Christian Porter is in the House introducing the Australian citizenship amendment bill – which would make it easier for the government to strip citizenship from terrorists. Paul Karp will bring you something on that soon. This is a place where all of us can help shape the nature of our society. Indeed, we can be a force for good. Mr President, that’s why I couldn’t withdraw my statement yesterday, because the repeated shaming and innuendo directed and not just across at this side of the chamber but directed right across the Senate is reinforcing a culture of workplace harassment and the open harassment of women in our society.
Mathias Cormann, Penny Wong and Richard Di Natale have all given speeches about some of the comments aimed at Senate colleagues – mostly women – and how they need to stop. Australia does have a deep and disturbing problem of violence against women. I remember Malcolm Turnbull, the former Prime Minister saying that not all disrespect towards women leads to violence but that’s where all the violence against women starts.
Di Natale says he spoke to the deputy Senate president the day before about some of the comments being thrown towards his colleagues, such as “go and have a cry”, as context for why he refused to withdraw his comment. He says there is a precedent for senators making comments and, if they are caught, withdrawing them, then nothing further is done – “but everyone has heard them”. We in this play should be setting an example for the nation, and and yet these, one of the most powerful institutions of the country, allows men to openly and brazenly shame, insult and harass female members of parliament dash and it reinforces that culture that leads to 72 women are being murdered by their partners this year.
He wants a code of conduct adopted within the Senate. Abuse against women is everyone’s business. All of us have a role to play in that. There is a great reckoning going on in our society, where all of us are reflecting on our behaviours in the past and are trying to do what we can to help lead the change we need to see in our society. As men, we have been perpetrators, we have been responsible for responsible for creating that culture, and that’s why it is up to men to make a stand and to call it out.
The current rules are not working, we are allowing harassment and we are allowing women to be demeaned in this chamber. We must no longer tolerate workplace harassment in the chamber. It must stop.
Every time the camera goes to Barry O’Sullivan he is shaking his head in disbelief. There has been a repeated pattern from a small number of men in this chamber who, either through whispers or, sometimes, on the record, make the most demeaning and insulting comments directed against many of my colleagues.
Scott Ryan starts the Senate with a reminder of what he said to the senators in August – about behaviour and language and how senators speak to each other. When this was raised some time ago and you made your statement, Mr President, I had a conversation with Senator Sarah Hanson-Young that forced me to reflect on my own role in this dash that I’d not stood up, that I’d stayed silent, that I’d assume this was just part of what it means to be a Senator in this place.
He said that yesterday the Senate again fell short: I apologised to Senator Hanson-Young and I said that I would now stand up and call it out whenever I heard it, that she would not be alone. And yet, despite your statement—a very welcome statement, Mr President—this behaviour continues. They do it over and over and over again. Sometimes you don’t hear it, but we do.
This is not just a matter of rules, this is a matter of respect, of each other, the institution, of those who elected us, and the [people] whose interests we represent. Sometimes they put it on the record. It’s deliberate. It’s calculated. Then they withdraw it. But those words can never be taken back. They hurt and they damage. That’s why yesterday I made the statement I did.
Ryan says if the Senate can’t debate matters of gender, race and differences respectfully, then how can we expect public debates to be any better? I also want to give some context to what happened yesterday.
He is putting forward a motion to minimise the debates that get out of control – which is the general business. He wants to allow motions to suspend standing orders but not the debate. The day before, I approached the Deputy President of the Senate because that behaviour that occurred yesterday had occurred the day before and on the back of months of a pattern of behaviour.
It will be up to the Senate to decide if that change can be made. I indicated to the Deputy President that I would be writing to you, Mr President, to inform you that, when a senator yells across the chamber to a female colleague, ‘Going to have a cry,’ because they don’t like what they’re hearing, that’s unacceptable. It would be unacceptable in a classroom, it would be unacceptable on the factory floor, it would be unacceptable in a business and it’s unacceptable in the Senate.
The bells are ringing, which means parliament is about to start. Yesterday Senator O’Sullivan used words that were designed to hurt and humiliate a fellow colleague.
After refusing to withdraw a comment that Barry O’Sullivan was “a pig” yesterday, and getting suspended from the Senate, Richard Di Natale is allowed back into the chamber this morning. The day before other senators in this place used words that were aggressive and threatening. I want to thank Senator O’Neill for standing up and calling them out when she heard them.
What’s the point of referring Peter Dutton if the high court won’t get to it until just before the general election next year, anyway? The question for us now as a chamber is: our words are not? Is a call to people in this place to lift the standard of behaviour enough? I don’t think it is, Mr President, because we have heard it time and time again.
Chris Bowen says it is the principle. When in September 2017 Senator Hanson wore a burqa into this Senate I sought for the Senate to adopt a code of conduct that would prevent this offensive and harmful behaviour.
Well that’s a matter for the parliament and the high court. I mean we’ve known about this cloud over Peter Dutton for several months. So to the extent that your point is valid and it’s a legitimate point you make, it could have been dealt with if he was referred several months ago. Now it’s up to the parliament to consider its options if Peter Dutton doesn’t have the courage to refer himself to the high court, the government doesn’t have the courage to refer one of their own to the high court as I said in fairness both sides have done previously. In August this year, following a horrific first speech, again I sought to have a code of conduct adopted, and was rejected by both the government and the opposition. The current rules are not working. We are allowing harassment and we are allowing women to be demeaned in this chamber.
And I see frankly reports that the government is engaging in a smear campaign against Kerryn Phelps and others. I mean what an act of low rent desperation to say ‘Well if he gets referred we are going to refer to all these people’. I mean we’ve been through that, the Australian people are over that. Every member of parliament declared in the audit process in a declaration their issues in relation to section 44 and citizenship in particular. We been through the process. Peter Dutton is the member of parliament with questions to answer and to try in some sort of desperate dirty unit campaign smear independents and others is pretty low rent pathetic activity by the Morrison government.” They stand on all sides of the chamber but predominantly they are those people who are walking out right now who aren’t strong enough, who simply cannot hear the truth.
On Monday, Katharine Murphy reported Craig Kelly was considering moving to the crossbench if he loses preselection in Hughes. They are the cowards here. It’s very clear that, despite your words this morning, Mr President, they take no heed of the call on all of us to improve the standards in this place.
Now that has as much danger for the government as George Christensen’s threats to move to the crossbench. One of the most conservative members of the Coalition is not going to suddenly start supporting Labor policy or moves in the House. Plus, he is running out of time – parliament only has four days of sitting left this year. And then there are only 10 before the budget is handed down scheduled for next year. The men who use sexism to belittle or intimidate women should not be tolerated in any society and they most certainly should not be tolerated in the Australian Senate.
But Kelly knows the power of the threat, particularly after Julia Banks’s move so he just made it again on Sky News. Asked by Laura Jayes if he accepted he was increasing instability by not ruling out a move to the crossbench, Kelly answered: Mr President, we accept your recommendation in terms of the way we will handle the discovery of formal business, but we need to do more than that. We need to ensure that there are strong rules and a strong code of conduct that does not allow this offensive behaviour to continue.
“No, no I don’t.” Penny Wong:
“ ... There are no threats, whatsoever,” he said. Ultimately this debate is about what sort of place we want this Senate to be. This is a great institution of the Australian democracy and it is incumbent upon all of us to live up to that standard. The approach Labor took yesterday is very clear: we will not tolerate sexist and abusive behaviour.
“My job here is to talk up and explain the great work that this Liberal government has done, and also, to explain and expose the dangers and continue talking about the risks of a Labor government, that is my job, that is what I am concentrating on.” We will not tolerate it in the Senate and we will not tolerate it anywhere. We also believe parliament cannot function without the respect for the presiding officers and the rules that parliament has agreed to regarding appropriate behaviour.
A note on the Liberal party and the number of women within its parliamentarian ranks. But I make this point: the Senate itself will not be respected if the behaviours exhibited in here demean it.
Of the government’s 74 lower house MPs, 12 are women. That goes not only to rules but also to standards and expectations. The people of Australia who elect us want to see us interacting with each other as adult human beings. We on this side of the chamber recognise that this is a place of robust debate. We have a battle of ideas in this chamber. The battle of ideas can be robust, but it can be respectful of each other and of this place.
Of that 12, Jane Prentice and Ann Sudmalis lost preselection – Prentice, formally, and Sudmalis, who quit before she was pushed, having lost control of the branch. There must be a distinction drawn between what is acceptable argument and personal smears and innuendo.
Of the 10 who remain, four – Nicolle Flint, Lucy Wicks, Michelle Landry and Sarah Henderson – have a margin under 3% We saw those expectations trashed yesterday by Senator O’Sullivan—and he is not the first person in this chamber to do so—by his engaging in deliberately offensive personal remarks. The community rightly expects a higher standard of debate than to make insinuations of a personal character.
In the preselections, (some of which are still to be completed) women have been chosen in just two winnable seats – Macnamara and Chisholm. Such personal comments, including references—oblique or otherwise—to people’s personal lives, should always be off limits. This has been long recognised not only in our standing orders but also in the standards of behaviour we expect of each other.
From that, the Liberal party is looking at retaining six women MPs at the next election. If some miracle occurs and the government holds every single seat they currently hold, the number of women they currently claim still drops by two. When it comes to treatment of women in this place there are some who should particularly reflect on their actions and words. I ask them to consider whether their partners, wives or daughters would permit themselves to be treated in such an offensive way.
The last time things were that bad in terms of gender parity for the parliamentary Liberal party, Meatloaf, Whitney Houston and Sonia Dada were topping the Australian charts and Paul Keating was prime minister. The shaming of women has been used for decades, even centuries, as a tool of control by those in power. It is odious behaviour, it has never been appropriate and it is not acceptable in this place.
And while they keep pointing to the Senate, they also bumped Lucy Gichuhi, so the net gain in the red chamber is still just two. To use a sporting analogy: play the ball, not the man or woman. There are some people in this place who I believe need to find a map and compass how to conduct themselves in debate and in other fora, including committee hearings, without going after women personally.
Further from the Our Watch event, a new report has found that the NBN is leading to more Australian women starting businesses. Our colleagues and our daughters deserve no less. Mr President, I indicate the opposition’s support of the approach you have flagged in relation to the discovery process.
From AAP: Mathias Cormann:
The number of self-employed women working from home grew at twice the rate in NBN connected areas, compared to places without fast broadband. Mr President, the government supports your statement and your actions in the chamber yesterday. In supporting your statement let me also reflect that ours is a chamber in which of course we engage in the battle of ideas on behalf of the communities, states and people we represent, and at times that debate can become quite robust, but there is always a requirement and a responsibility on all of us to engage in the debate in a way that is appropriately robust but also appropriately respectful.
The Connecting Australia report, commissioned by NBN Co, found an additional 52,200 women are expected to be business owners by 2021 due to NBN access. It is true that in recent times we’re getting to that point of the cycle where tensions increase somewhat in the natural course of events, but it is very important for all of us to remind ourselves of the standards that people expect us to observe as we engage in important business as an important part of our parliamentary democracy.
There was a 2.4 per cent jump for female self-employment in regional Australian towns with NBN connectivity. My point of view is I have always sought to engage willingly but also very respectfully in the debates that we inevitably enter into, and I think it is incumbent on all senators to engage in those debates in the same spirit.
The latest NBN progress report has 4.5 million homes and businesses connected to a broadband plan, up from 3.1 million at the same time last year. From the government’s point of view we also will consider any proposals that will come forward through the procedure committee to improve what has become an increasingly contentious part of Senate business during the day, and I think that the proposition that you’ve put forward has a lot of merit.”
But it means three million people have access but do not have a plan, with the ready-to-connect figure at 7.5 million, up from 6.4 million a year ago.” As promised, the Senate speeches on behaviour:
The National Press Club is addressing this today: Scott Ryan:
What is driving women towards female self-employment and what impact is this having on the nature of work? How can female entrepreneurship benefit regional communities? How can we encourage today’s girls & young women to be business leaders of the future? #NPC #enterprisingwomen pic.twitter.com/n33XPuvbvs Senators, when parliament resumed in August this year, we discussed certain events in June and committed to reflecting our better selves in this place and the aspirations of those we represent, rather than sliding into abuse. One of the things I said at the time was it is far better that that positive attention is attracted by our words and contributions to debate. On several occasions in recent times, this has not been the case. As a chamber, we did not meet this standard yesterday. I state again: unparliamentary, offensive epithets and abuse have no place in this chamber. This is rightly a place of vigorous debate, but personal abuse has no place, particularly if it targets personal attributes such as race or gender, nor does the use of abusive epithets or labels.
Which prompted a Coalition MP to contact me to point out that the Liberal party is managing to “lose women, in a week all about women”. I will use every authority granted to me by the Senate when I personally hear such abuse or when it is brought to my attention. But this is not just a matter of rules. This is a matter of respect of each other, of the institution, of those who elected us and in whose interests and names we act. I reiterate what I said yesterday, and it’s a simple principle of decency we should all aspire to reflect. Every senator should reflect not just on what they think they’re saying but how it may be received or interpreted by another with a different life experience or perspective than yourself. We need to lead by example, for if we cannot debate and act civilly in this chamber, then how can we expect people outside the chamber to debate and argue and disagree in a respectful manner as well? But I will make this important point to all Australians, that, while none of us here are perfect—and I certainly am not—the overwhelming majority of time in the Senate does meet this test. The overwhelming majority of senators always aspire to represent the best interests and act accordingly.
It seems to be a common theme this morning – someone else has pointed out the “ridiculously irony” the government finds itself in this week – having defended its NBN model for years, “when the data finally shows the network is changing things and encouraging a significant jump in female self-employment, the party’s treatment of women overshadows it”. Now to the specific matter of conducting Senate business. A number of proposals have been considered to deal with what has become, frankly, the most unedifying period of the Senate day—general business. What was once a time to deal with matters that didn’t require debate or amendment has become a pseudodebate where senators are required to vote on matters without an opportunity for discussion. What was once non-contentious is now the most combative period. It isn’t serving its purpose and is rapidly cascading into farce. As a means of dealing with this, I’ve asked the Deputy President and the Senate Procedure Committee to bring forward a temporary order that would remove the ability to debate a proposed suspension of standing orders to enable the Senate to deal with a motion if leave to do so is denied. The effect of this is simply that, if formality for a motion is denied and a suspension of standing orders is moved to ensure the motion can be dealt with, there will be no debate on that procedural motion. Whether this is adopted is, of course, a matter for the chamber itself.”
As first reported by Phil Coorey and Tom McIlroy at the AFR, Josh Frydenberg has cancelled his planned trip to the G20. Right now, no one has the numbers to refer anyone.
From the AFR: Labor is closer to having the numbers for Peter Dutton and potentially, Chris Crewther, than the government is to having it’s target list – and it has been issued as a target list - referred.
Treasurer Josh Frydenberg has pulled out of this weekend’s G20 summit in Argentina, opting to remain in Canberra amid parliamentary chaos for the Coalition. Because they both need the crossbench.
Mr Frydenberg had been due to travel to the annual leaders meeting in Buenos Aires with Prime Minister Scott Morrison after Parliament rises on Thursday, but the defection of Victorian Liberal Julia Banks to the crossbench on Tuesday has rocked the government. And I am not sure of the government strategy of trying to piss off the crossbench in a minority parliament, but better minds and all that.
Mr Morrison will still attend the meeting, but is now not expected to have a formal meeting with US President Donald Trump after being left off a list of bilateral sit downs announced by the White House. I mean, Sun Tzu probably wouldn’t have recommended it.
The government is considering whether Finance Minister Mathias Cormann should attend the meeting instead.” Labor has given no indication of what it plans on doing, in terms of timing – which is more in line with Tzu’s advice to let ‘your plans be dark and as impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt’, but that is probably because they aren’t actually sure they have the numbers either.
Earlier this morning, Rebehka Sharkie repeated that she believed Peter Dutton should have his section 44 concerns addressed.
She would know, having gone through the process herself:
I think it’s quite clear Peter Dutton has a case to answer and he hasn’t provided any information to the Parliament. I don’t think he’s done that as yet. And I believe even the Solicitor-General’s advice was a little unclear. So I think the best thing that Peter Dutton could do would be to refer himself. The Government really could take the lead on this. They could refer Peter Dutton and it’s these sorts of issues that make the Australian public frustrated with the Parliament, but also frustrated with the Government.”
Dutton is still on medical leave, having injured his arm mending a (literal) fence.
These three were named by Sarah Hanson-Young yesterday as among, in her view, the worst offenders of throwing out disparaging remarks.
Here is the moment senators O'Sullivan, Anning and Leyonhjelm walked out as Greens leader Richard Di Natale spoke about the treatment of women in the Senate #auspol pic.twitter.com/2zNAQqfuwP
It’s all going great
After 20 years in Parliament and over half of that time as deputy leader of our party, I think I can 'cut it'. 😊 https://t.co/qdEA5IniM3