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 5 Version 6
Richard Di Natale calls three senators who walked out 'cowards' – politics live Richard Di Natale calls three senators who walked out 'cowards' – politics live
(35 minutes later)
The Big School Walkout for Climate Action has come to Australian Parliament House - and the students are now being let in after a misunderstanding with the police. Anthony Albanese told Adelaide radio 5AA why he thought next year’s parliamentary sitting calandar put out by the government was rubbish:
Organiser Georgie Burgess told Guardian Australia that after speaking to students the police believed they were coming to protest and conduct a sit-in in parliament but the children were just joking. The fact is that – I’ve done the sitting timetable on six occasions and what you do is you look for when Australia Day is, and Parliament comes back the week after Australia Day. That’s the normal process. The Parliament also sits in March. There is either five or six sitting weeks in the schedule prior to April, and there is no reason why you can’t have five or six sitting weeks prior to the April Budget. The only reason why there is not, is because they are running from democracy.”
“Our plan is to have calm, polite conversations with politicians, we do not want to have any protesting inside the house,” she said. Christopher Pyne said it was a totally different thing next year, because of the April budget. Or something.
Carys, from Dickson College, said the students “have come out to show politicians that climate change is an issue that we can’t ignore anymore, so much so that we need to strike from school, we need to stop our learning because our future is at risk”. “...The Budget has been brought forward a month. So it’s actually a completely different sitting schedule. There are 17 sitting weeks next year, which is the average, is the norm and everyone knows that – 17 sitting weeks next year.”
“Us kids we really need them to help us because they have our futures in their hands, we’re going to ask them whether they’re willing to say no to the Adani coalmine, whether they’ve going to reduce our carbon emissions to zero, whether they are committed to make us a greener country and world leader in climate action, which we are not at the moment - we are the laughing stock of the world.” Albo says there are 10 sitting days until August. Pyne says he has his “maths completely wrong”.
The students - from Dickson College, Orana Steiner School, and Chapman primary school among others in the ACT - are now being let in. But that’s because Scott Morrison all but said the election will be in May. It’s just whether it is May 11 or May 18 which is the issue. He want the budget handed down before the election, and that is happening on April 2. There are two sitting weeks scheduled before then. Then it’s budget week. And then, presumably, parliament is dissolved for the election. Ipso factso – that’s not a lot of sitting days before the election.
Something we missed on Tuesday afternoon: the education minister, Dan Tehan, has announced the next round of Australian Research Council grants after a controversy about the Coalition vetoing $4m of grants in previous rounds and Labor’s Kim Carr criticising them for delays.
The Universities Australia chief executive, Catriona Jackson, noted that three researchers whose grants had been vetoed by the former education minister Simon Birmingham were successful in this round.
“Of course, that still leaves eight research grants that were rejected by Senator Birmingham that remain unfunded by the ARC,” she said.
Tehan said those three grants had been successful this round because they are “now markedly different”.
Carr said they had been approved after “minor changes to titles”:
ACU – Masculinity and social change in Australia (previously A history of men’s dress)
UNSW – Rioting and the literary archive (unchanged)
ANU – Art of cultural diplomacy (previously Louis XIV prints, medals and materials in the global exchange)
Ayes 97
Noes 5
That is not a vote result you see every day in this place.
Labor did a deal with the government to ensure that the legislation would get through.
Funny scene in the House right now – it has divided on the social services amendment bill, which will make new migrants have to wait even longer for access to Newstart and the like and the whole chamber, except for five crossbenchers, is voting for it.
The Big School Walkout for Climate Action has come to Parliament House – and the students are now being let in after a misunderstanding with the police.
An organiser, Georgie Burgess, told Guardian Australia that police had believed the students were coming to protest and conduct a sit-in at parliament but the children were just joking.
“Our plan is to have calm, polite conversations with politicians – we do not want to have any protesting inside the house,” she said.
Carys, from Dickson College, said the students “have come out to show politicians that climate change is an issue that we can’t ignore any more, so much so that we need to strike from school, we need to stop our learning, because our future is at risk”.
Us kids we really need them to help us because they have our futures in their hands, we’re going to ask them whether they’re willing to say no to the Adani coalmine, whether they’ve going to reduce our carbon emissions to zero, whether they are committed to make us a greener country and world leader in climate action, which we are not at the moment – we are the laughing stock of the world.
The students – from Dickson College, Orana Steiner school and Chapman primary school, among others in the ACT – are now entering the building.
Scott Morrison said school students should be in school.Scott Morrison said school students should be in school.
The Greens passed a Senate motion which basically said go well, protesting school students and stick it to the man.The Greens passed a Senate motion which basically said go well, protesting school students and stick it to the man.
Then some students turned up at Parliament House and were delayed from entering by police, who have since permitted them entry.Then some students turned up at Parliament House and were delayed from entering by police, who have since permitted them entry.
It’s quite the lesson in democracy so far.It’s quite the lesson in democracy so far.
Dickson college students at Big School Walkout for Climate Action at parliament house. Now getting let in after hold-up with the cops. pic.twitter.com/UNcOjurmPzDickson college students at Big School Walkout for Climate Action at parliament house. Now getting let in after hold-up with the cops. pic.twitter.com/UNcOjurmPz
If only there was a forum for parliamentarians to parley that wasn’t social media ...If only there was a forum for parliamentarians to parley that wasn’t social media ...
Complete lie from @Tony_Burke and he knows it. There are 9 weeks scheduled for the first half of the year and we have to have an election: like we do every 3 years! #auspol https://t.co/351kXR6PVgComplete lie from @Tony_Burke and he knows it. There are 9 weeks scheduled for the first half of the year and we have to have an election: like we do every 3 years! #auspol https://t.co/351kXR6PVg
Re Senate behaviour: Simon Birmingham notes Barry O'Sullivan lost his pre-selection: "Perhaps means that he becomes even harder to influence from time to time in terms of what he says or does - but the [National] Party has taken its actions...."#auspol @abcadelaideRe Senate behaviour: Simon Birmingham notes Barry O'Sullivan lost his pre-selection: "Perhaps means that he becomes even harder to influence from time to time in terms of what he says or does - but the [National] Party has taken its actions...."#auspol @abcadelaide
A spokesman for the prime minister says there is no concern about the lack of a formal sit-down with Donald Trump at the G20 (remember there are opportunities for lots of “informal chats” at dinners and in corridors and at photo ops and things).A spokesman for the prime minister says there is no concern about the lack of a formal sit-down with Donald Trump at the G20 (remember there are opportunities for lots of “informal chats” at dinners and in corridors and at photo ops and things).
The PM will no doubt have the opportunity to touch base during the G20 meetings.The PM will no doubt have the opportunity to touch base during the G20 meetings.
But given we have no pressing bilateral issues at the moment, and the PM had an extensive opportunity with Vice-President [Mike] Pence, there is no pressing need for a formal bilateral at this stage.But given we have no pressing bilateral issues at the moment, and the PM had an extensive opportunity with Vice-President [Mike] Pence, there is no pressing need for a formal bilateral at this stage.
The relationship is being well-managed.The relationship is being well-managed.
Julie Bishop also spoke on this:Julie Bishop also spoke on this:
I’m not involved in the prime minister’s scheduling, nor that of President Trump, so I’m sure if the meeting can take place, it will, but if scheduling conflicts occur, that’s what happens in some of these meetings. The G20 meetings are hectic. They are, from my experience, very busy and you don’t always meet with every one of the other leaders at that time, but there are many opportunities for world leaders to meet, and the Australia-US relationship is strong and deep and it will continue, whomever is in the White House, whomever is in The Lodge.I’m not involved in the prime minister’s scheduling, nor that of President Trump, so I’m sure if the meeting can take place, it will, but if scheduling conflicts occur, that’s what happens in some of these meetings. The G20 meetings are hectic. They are, from my experience, very busy and you don’t always meet with every one of the other leaders at that time, but there are many opportunities for world leaders to meet, and the Australia-US relationship is strong and deep and it will continue, whomever is in the White House, whomever is in The Lodge.
Julie Bishop has held a short press conference in Canberra before her donation of her now infamous red shoes to the Australian Museum of Democracy.Julie Bishop has held a short press conference in Canberra before her donation of her now infamous red shoes to the Australian Museum of Democracy.
She had a bit to say about all the shenanigans, and it is best to let her say it. Or not say it, as the case may be *cough Peter Dutton referral cough*.She had a bit to say about all the shenanigans, and it is best to let her say it. Or not say it, as the case may be *cough Peter Dutton referral cough*.
On whether Peter Dutton should be referred, and whether Christopher Pyne should threaten the crossbench with referrals:On whether Peter Dutton should be referred, and whether Christopher Pyne should threaten the crossbench with referrals:
This is a matter for themselves to be eligible to sit in the parliament ... I wasn’t present when Christopher Pyne spoke with or spoke about Kerryn Phelps: I’m not aware of the terms of what he said, but my point is every member has a responsibility to ensure that they are eligible to sit in the parliament. Every member should take their advice. Where there is doubt, then in the past, the people have referred themselves or have been referred. So it is a question for everyone to look at their own eligibility. I’ve certainly considered mine, and I’m perfectly satisfied that I’m eligible and have always been eligible to sit in the federal parliament.This is a matter for themselves to be eligible to sit in the parliament ... I wasn’t present when Christopher Pyne spoke with or spoke about Kerryn Phelps: I’m not aware of the terms of what he said, but my point is every member has a responsibility to ensure that they are eligible to sit in the parliament. Every member should take their advice. Where there is doubt, then in the past, the people have referred themselves or have been referred. So it is a question for everyone to look at their own eligibility. I’ve certainly considered mine, and I’m perfectly satisfied that I’m eligible and have always been eligible to sit in the federal parliament.
On Julia Banks and women in the Liberal party:On Julia Banks and women in the Liberal party:
Julia informed me after she had made the statement in parliament. In fact, she informed a number of us after she had made her statement …Julia informed me after she had made the statement in parliament. In fact, she informed a number of us after she had made her statement …
Well, it was apparent to everyone who follows politics that she was not happy with the leadership change in August. She put out a statement at the time, so you only have to read her statement that she was obviously not happy with the outcome of that issue …Well, it was apparent to everyone who follows politics that she was not happy with the leadership change in August. She put out a statement at the time, so you only have to read her statement that she was obviously not happy with the outcome of that issue …
It is quite evident that there are now a number of women sitting on the crossbench who hold what were once considered safe Liberal seats and that of course is a matter of concern, and I know the party is concerned about that.It is quite evident that there are now a number of women sitting on the crossbench who hold what were once considered safe Liberal seats and that of course is a matter of concern, and I know the party is concerned about that.
In the case of Julia Banks, I’m disappointed that she felt the need to leave the Liberal party, and she had got to that point. However, knowing her as I do, she obviously gave it a lot of thought and she must believe that this is how she can best represent the interests of the people of Chisholm. I believe I can best represent the people of Curtin by being a member of the Liberal party.In the case of Julia Banks, I’m disappointed that she felt the need to leave the Liberal party, and she had got to that point. However, knowing her as I do, she obviously gave it a lot of thought and she must believe that this is how she can best represent the interests of the people of Chisholm. I believe I can best represent the people of Curtin by being a member of the Liberal party.
On Kelly O’Dwyer’s reported comments that the Liberal party is now viewed as “homophobic, anti-women, climate-change deniers” and on the number of women in the Liberal party:On Kelly O’Dwyer’s reported comments that the Liberal party is now viewed as “homophobic, anti-women, climate-change deniers” and on the number of women in the Liberal party:
I understand that they were comments that were attributed to Kelly O’Dwyer. I’m not aware of whether she actually said them. They were attributed to her by someone who was apparently at a meeting, but I think Kelly has expressed before her concern about the level of female representation in the Liberal party.I understand that they were comments that were attributed to Kelly O’Dwyer. I’m not aware of whether she actually said them. They were attributed to her by someone who was apparently at a meeting, but I think Kelly has expressed before her concern about the level of female representation in the Liberal party.
Indeed, she set up a fighting fund to which I’ve donated money to support women who are contesting marginal seats because she believes that more money is needed to support them and I agree. So, Kelly has long been on the record expressing her concern about the level of female representation on the part of the Liberal party …Indeed, she set up a fighting fund to which I’ve donated money to support women who are contesting marginal seats because she believes that more money is needed to support them and I agree. So, Kelly has long been on the record expressing her concern about the level of female representation on the part of the Liberal party …
What I think is interesting about today is that we have an initiative in the parliament called Girls Taking Over the Parliament ... they have come to parliament to see how it operates, to see what opportunities there are. There are bright young women “taking over parliament”, so there clearly is a need for us to discuss the level of representation of females in the parliament. There is a need for us to increase that. When I talk about a nation not reaching its potential unless is fully harnesses the efforts and energies and skills of 50% of the population, that goes for organisations as well, and that includes the Liberal party.What I think is interesting about today is that we have an initiative in the parliament called Girls Taking Over the Parliament ... they have come to parliament to see how it operates, to see what opportunities there are. There are bright young women “taking over parliament”, so there clearly is a need for us to discuss the level of representation of females in the parliament. There is a need for us to increase that. When I talk about a nation not reaching its potential unless is fully harnesses the efforts and energies and skills of 50% of the population, that goes for organisations as well, and that includes the Liberal party.
On Barry O’Sullivan’s comments yesterday in the Senate:On Barry O’Sullivan’s comments yesterday in the Senate:
I wasn’t there, I didn’t hear them. I have heard fleetingly reports on it, so I won’t give a running commentary on what goes on in the Senate, but we all have to take personal responsibility for our behaviour, and of course we should be respectful towards each other whether it’s in the parliament or outside the parliament …I wasn’t there, I didn’t hear them. I have heard fleetingly reports on it, so I won’t give a running commentary on what goes on in the Senate, but we all have to take personal responsibility for our behaviour, and of course we should be respectful towards each other whether it’s in the parliament or outside the parliament …
I wasn’t here in Canberra yesterday. I had a pair. I was attending a number of meetings in Sydney that were very important, so I wasn’t here. I’m not going to give a running commentary on what every senator says in the Senate. My overall point is that we take personal responsibility, each of us, for the way we behave.I wasn’t here in Canberra yesterday. I had a pair. I was attending a number of meetings in Sydney that were very important, so I wasn’t here. I’m not going to give a running commentary on what every senator says in the Senate. My overall point is that we take personal responsibility, each of us, for the way we behave.
Mathias Cormann has got the call-up for the G20.Mathias Cormann has got the call-up for the G20.
He will replace the treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, who now has to remain in Canberra, because, well, it is all a bit of a garbage fire at the moment.He will replace the treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, who now has to remain in Canberra, because, well, it is all a bit of a garbage fire at the moment.
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.
Ahem, government MPs – might want to check your schedules.
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
Richard Di Natale:
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.
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.
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.
We in this place should be setting an example for the nation, and and yet one of the most powerful institutions of the country allows men to openly and brazenly shame, insult and harass female members of parliament – and it reinforces that culture that leads to 72 women are being murdered by their partners this year.
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.
We must no longer tolerate workplace harassment in the chamber. It must stop.
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.
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 – 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.
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.
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.
I also want to give some context to what happened yesterday.
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.
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.
Yesterday Senator O’Sullivan used words that were designed to hurt and humiliate a fellow colleague.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Penny Wong:
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.
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.
But I make this point: the Senate itself will not be respected if the behaviours exhibited in here demean it.
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.
There must be a distinction drawn between what is acceptable argument and personal smears and innuendo.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
Mathias Cormann:
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.
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.
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.
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.
As promised, here are the Senate speeches on behaviour:
Scott Ryan:
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.
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.
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 pseudo debate 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.
Right now, no one has the numbers to refer anyone.
Labor is closer to having the numbers for Peter Dutton and potentially, Chris Crewther, than the government is to having its target list – and it has been issued as a target list – referred.
Because they both need the crossbench.
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.
I mean, Sun Tzu probably wouldn’t have recommended it.
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 it isn’t actually sure it has 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