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/dec/03/liberals-coalition-turnbull-craig-kelly-preselection-question-time-labor-politics-live

The article has changed 20 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 12 Version 13
Scott Morrison faces MPs after intervention in Craig Kelly saga – question time live Scott Morrison faces MPs after intervention in Craig Kelly saga – question time live
(35 minutes later)
After last week accidentally saying that the NSW Liberal party would like to see Ian Macdonald, her own colleague sent to Siberia in this Senate question time exchange: Question time ends.
Doug Cameron: Does this minister agree with her colleagues in NSW who are saying the Prime Minister should go to Siberia?” Tony Burke stands up after learning of this:
Ryan: “There was a lot in that question, Senator Cameron.” I have just been kicked out of #QT because you can allegedly see too much skin. His insane #Auspol pic.twitter.com/51KipESXlG
Marise Payne: “I think there would be an enormous amount of enthusiasm in the NSW Labor Party for a one-way ticket to Siberia for Senator Macdonald.” He says that it is a rule he has never heard before – and if it needs to be fixed, it should be fixed.
Marise Payne has just accidentally referred to Senate president Scott Ryan as “Mr Terrorist”. Kerryn Phelps asks Christian Porter why the government won’t pass the religious discrimination bill, Porter said that the government “wants to get this done”, but the compromise won’t go far enough to support what the government wants and it “has to be a balance of passage”.
On that last point Christian Porter raised, a quick check of the Senate committee’s website shows the AFP have not made a public submission. Mark Butler asks Scott Morrison about Craig Kelly’s threat to move to the crossbench and Malcolm Turnbull’s opinion that saving him would be the “worst and weakest response”.
Janet Rice was also upset by the government’s move (supported by enough of the crossbenchers, including Centre Alliance, that it got through) to stop debate on the religious discrimination bill: Morrison says that Kelly never made the threat.
This is an appalling use of Senate process, and it is leaving lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students in despair. Three-quarters of the Australian community want to see discrimination ended in schools, full stop—no ifs or buts—and they want it to end now. The Prime Minister himself, before the Wentworth by-election, said that it was urgent to act to end discrimination now. Yet we have just seen this appalling use of Senate process. This bill has been pushed off into the long grass. I can’t tell you much more, because, like a lot of people in this place I could name, the transcription service has given up.
We had the opportunity today to change our laws for the better, so that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students would have been protected, would have felt safe and would have felt supported in their school communities, regardless of what school they went to. But the appalling actions of this government, together with Centre Alliance—who have shown their true colours in what they are doing today—have meant that this opportunity is passing us by. The Greens believed that we had the numbers in this place to end discrimination against teachers as well. But the government, coupled with Centre Alliance, are not allowing this debate to occur and not allowing a vote to occur today. It is an absolute travesty and it is incredibly sad for those many people in our community, the same people who fought a year ago for marriage equality, who were hoping that a year later, as part of the anniversary of marriage equality, we would act to end discrimination and support young people in all of our schools. But it is not to be, because of the outrageous actions of this government and the Centre Alliance senators.” Christopher Pyne has just had a chat with Scott Morrison and then wandered over to have a chat to the crossbench.
Christian Porter continues: He gets whatever answer he wants and wanders back to Morrison.
The shadow attorney general says that appears to be some form of confidential communication and as I have noted, will give me for wanting to speak with the commission first to determine whether or not that was all was not some form of confidential communication and to discuss that matter with him. David Littleproud gets the next dixer and it looks like he is sticking to the ‘no yelling is good yelling’ qt approach.
And if he takes the view that some action should be taken I will of course listen to that view. After successfully calling Ken O’Dowd and Barnaby Joyce under this tactic, Tony Burke is now moving to have Craig Kelly answer a question.
But if only it were the case that the shadow attorney general were as concerned about the national security of Australians who face terrorist attacks as he were about smearing the prime minister, or any member on the side of the house. Burke:
And this is classic modus operandi of this member opposite. Whenever he runs into problems because of his own failure to act in a reasonable way, run a smokescreen. “I refer to the member’s motion on the notice paper which relates to the national energy guaranteed and that it provides certainty for investors. Understanding orders this motion will be removed from the notice paper if it is not selected for debate again. When will the motion be debated again, will be removed from the notice paper if it is not selected?”
Run a smear campaign. The difficulty that the shadow attorney general has, Mr Speaker, is that no Australian could physically be as smart as he thinks he is” Christopher Pyne raises to interject. Tony Smith calls on him “on irony first”.
I really don’t think that is the burn Porter thinks it is. Smith, who has been here before, allows the question.
Mark Dreyfus to Christian Porter: Craig Kelly uses the opportunity to again prove he does not know how microphones work and starts screaming about 45% targets being the worst and Labor not caring.
I refer to his previous answer and the front page of the Australian newspaper, which appears to quote directly from a confidential solution to the intelligence committee about the government’s encryption bill, which is a criminal offence under national security legislation, punishable with up to two years in prison. He sits down, with plenty of time on the clock, to applause from his side of the chamber, while Tony Burke asks for an extension of time.
Under national security legislation, prosecution for this offence can only be instigated by the Attorney General, all with his consent. Can the Attorney General guarantee to this house that he will not stand in the way of any prosecution for this criminal leak? Tony Smith again points out that you can only have an extension of time if you have run out of time.
Porter: Labor has made its point though. It’s Kelly’s bloated aubergine rant which will make the news bulletins and the whole place looks like a dog’s breakfast. And that’s being kind.
I think the shadow Attorney General for his question and it is the case that an article in the Australian today reads that the Federal Police Commissioner Andrew Colvin wrote to the joint committee on intelligence and security to express concerns about Labor’s proposal to split the encryption bill. Chris Bowen to Josh Frydenberg:
The AFP is concerned that a purpose -based approach would impose a variety of significant issues that would challenge the effectiveness of the regime and undermined the policy intent of the measures. I refer to statements made by industry groups that the government’s propose to powers represent deep and genuine sovereign risk or discourage badly needed investment in the energy sector and will only lead to increased investment uncertainty and prices. Even the government’s big stick really just a big mistake that will lead to sovereign risk and higher power prices? Why is this Liberal government abandoned its policy commitment to free enterprise?”
Mr Speaker, whether that was a confidential communication or not, I simply cannot answer. The shadow Attorney General’s questioned said that it appears to be. Well, you know, forgive me if I will reserve my view as to whether or not it appears or does not appear to be until I have had the chance to speak to the Commissioner about that” Frydenberg:
Christian Porter used his dixer to talk about the encryption laws, which seems a little strange, given that both parties are now back at the table and meant to be negotiating a compromise. The member for McMahon must have a short memory because of the last time the Labor Party was in government at a federal level, power prices doubled! Went up by over 100%, Mr Speaker. They ignored the warnings on gas, and as the member for Hume knows, they left us with potential shortfalls in the domestic gas market.
Bill Shorten associated the opposition with McCormack’s remarks: And now they are coming up with the pink batteries to solving energy issues.
There are 109 fires still burning. The loss of life is devastating. We send our condolences to the family. To the professionals and volunteers, thank you, thank you, thank you” And what about a replication nationally of what we saw in South Australia? The big experiment in South Australia, Mr Speaker.
Michael McCormack used his dixer to thank those fighting Queensland’s insane bushfires, and the communities they have swept through: When it comes to the coalition, 458,000 Australian families and 39,000 small businesses are today getting a better deal on their energy prices thanks to the work of the Morrison government.
That is the Queensland spirit and the spirit of good and true Australians that we are seeing across these fire affected regions. People west of Mackay, we can call them angels because they are ordinary everyday people doing extraordinary deeds. Because we are putting energy users consumers, businesses and families first.
Helping to cook for the firefighters, going beyond exhaustion to continue to help out with SES, help out with other volunteers, making sure people who have no home have something to eat and wear. Being there for a chat, it is these small gestures which make a difference. Whereas the Labor Party is siding with the energy companies. The fact is there is market misconduct.
They are inspiring. There so many efforts like that. You can see what a tremendous job the firefighters have done to save homes and property. Firefighters showed me a home surrounded by smoke and charred trees. There is market misconduct and we had to take the necessary action so they will be a range of remedies that are available, they range from a warning notice to enforceable undertakings to financial under penalties and fines and finally as a last resort to divert them.
Somehow those heroes on the frontline managed to save it from the flames. These other steps that need to be taken to ensure that energy consumers get the lowest possible prices.
It was quite unbelievable. I visited a school narrowly avoided being raised. School is in today, saved by a whisker. Emergency services risk their lives to save entire community. I know the people who live in those areas at the appreciative and grateful. And if I was the member for McMahon, rather than our air growing his big stick at it business with the tax policies, I would be worrying about the 3000 retirees in his electorate who are going to be worse off and the 7000 families who negative gear, all of whom will be worse off in the member for McMahon’s electorate as a result of Labor’s policy”
Tragically, one young man, just 21 lost his life while clearing a fire break on his family property. We mourn for his loss, we grieve with his community. While the fire still rage, we need people to stay calm, heed the advice of local authorities. Sigh.
It is very important to have a fire plan. We pay to be to the firefighters paid and unpaid. They are inspiring, great Australian. I urge Australians to keep the community than people and volunteers in mind, and to those affected, please be patient, stay calm, stay safe. Australians, we have your back. It is at this point I scream internally that the SA blackouts were caused by a giant fricking storm which knocked out the transmitters and you can have all the power in the world but it’s useless without the things that transmit it, but I am as dead inside as the government backbench.
Mark Dreyfus to Scott Morrison: Over in the Senate:
Can the Prime Minister guarantee that no minister, government member or their office played any role in the leaking of what appears to be a confidential submission to the intelligence committee which is a criminal offence under national security laws? Jenny McAllister: Given Mr Morrison has refused to save Jane Prentice, Ann Sudmalis, and Senators Molan and Gichuhi – but has today intervened to save Craig Kelly: How does Mr Morrison decide when to intervene? Why is there a quota for clowns, but not for women?
This is the quote Labor is talking about: Cory Bernardi: Point of order. You can’t refer to members of Parliament as clowns
Australian Federal Police Commissioner Andrew Colvin wrote to the joint committee on intelligence and security to express concern about Labor’s proposal to split the encryption bill. Jacinta Collins: The Prime Minister called you all Muppets!
“The AFP is very concerned such a purpose-based approach would pose a variety of significant issues that would challenge the effectiveness of the regime and undermine the policy intent of the measures,” Mr Colvin wrote. Scott Ryan: I actually could not hear the 2nd part of that question due to noise from my right. So if there was something unparliamentary I’d ask for it to be withdrawn but I did not hear the second part of that question. I was giving the Minister the courtesy to respond. He may have heard it. If there was nothing on that someone can bring something on Hansard to my attention.
After some back and forth over whether Morrison is responsible for answering it, he says he is unaware of what Dreyfus is talking about and follows with: Bernardi: Senator McAllister suggested that the Prime Minister failed to intervene in the preselection of clowns, It’s simply inappropriate and Senator McAllister knows. She should withdraw.
“If the Attorney General, shadow Attorney General wants to come in here and make these sort of grubby sneers, which is his habit in this place, he is well acquainted with the bottom of the chum bucket, the shadow Attorney General. He does this on a regular occasion, comes in here... Makes the most outrageous and offensive sneers without any evident what the weather. What I do know is as a member of the Labor Party, the shadow Attorney General voted against tougher penalties for paedophiles and gunrunners. I know that. I know that for a fact. So did the member of the Watson” Derryn Hinch: Isn’t truth a defence in New South Wales?
Tony Burke interrupts to say the answer has nothing to do with the question. The opposition are calling Angus Taylor “Biggus Stickus” and calling out lines from Monty Pythons Life of Brian during #weleaseWoger #QT @AmyRemeikis @GuardianAus #PoliticsLive pic.twitter.com/0kUN4wPhi7
The prime minister has concluded his answer.
Mathias Cormann during that same debate:
The Government does support what this legislation is seeking to achieve, but we support it with reasonable amendments to ensure that, for example, religious schools can provide appropriate rules for the proper conduct of their schools. We believe the government put forward five very sensible amendments.
Some of the crossbenchers have indicated to us in good faith that they needed some more time in order to consider the issues that they raise, and rather than doing what Senator Wong has indicated, upending the Senate, what we are doing is making sure that the Senate has proper opportunity to consider all of the issues, which is actually our job. What was in place was a guillotine to prevent the Senate from properly canvassing al of the issues, properly considering all of the issues.
We are actually as a government facilitating the proper consideration of what is a very important issue. We do want to see this legislation pass, but we want to see it pass in an amended form. We thank the Senate for having made a sensible decision today and having backed our judgment.”
We’ll head back to the Senate for a moment, to tell you what happened during that suspension of standing orders Paul Karp was telling you about.
Penny Wong:
I think that has just belled the cat, hasn’t it? The whole purpose of the shenanigans we have been through, aided and abetted by Central Alliance, who contrary to their indication that they would support LGBTIQ kids, have walked in here and helped Senator Cormann put off a vote on a bill they reckon they support, and this is a bill that Mr Morrison supports.
Let us be clear, the only reason why we have had the shenanigans we have just seen, no notice, coming in and upending the Senate, overturning the previous agreement of the Senate to vote on that legislation for which there was broad support in this chamber by ten to two, the only reason he had to walk in and suspend standing orders and pervert the process of the Senate, is because he is worried about the House of Representatives.
He is worried about the survival of the Government on the floor of the House of Representatives.
He has lost control. This is an indication of the chaos that is the Morrison Government. That they have to upend the Senate and not vote on protecting LGBTIQ kids, because they are so worried about the lack of control they have of the House of Representatives.
Do you know what the decent thing to do would be? Call an election! Call an election and stop perverting the processes of the Senate.
Voting against the position the Prime Minister has had, trying to desperately avoid a vote in the house, call an election instead of lying the way you have about this issue through the Wentworth by-election and through this week.
And shame on you. Senator Patrick, shame on you for doing this and aiding and abetting it.
We get through our first dixer. The backbench seems to be slowly waking up.
Mark Dreyfus to Scott Morrison:
Given the prime minister is extensively quoted in a report on the front page of the Australian newspaper which appear to include a leaked submission to the intelligence committee, and given the report is based on an exclusive interview conducted with the prime minister during his trip to Argentina for the G20, can the prime minister guarantee that neither he or his office played any role in the leaking of a confidential submission, which is a criminal offence?
As Morrison replies the
interjections get so loud, Tony Smith intervenes. Morrison continues:
...if they want to come in here and make grubby sneers against me, I find the suggestion offensive and reject it.”
Mark Dreyfus to Scott Morrison:
Is the Prime Minister aware that the front page of the Australian newspaper appears to quote from a confidential Australian Federal Police submission to the intelligence commission committee about the government’s encryption bill? Is the Prime Minister a way that leaking a confidential submission to the committee is a criminal offence under national security legislation, punishable with up to two years in prison? Has the Prime Minister asked the AFP to investigate this criminal leak?
Morrison takes the question on notice.
“I am happy to take notice the matter that the member has raised, and raise that in a discussion with the AFP, if indeed that is necessary. I would also only note this. That is that encryption is a tool being used by terrorists, organised criminals, paedophile rings, and it is something we must get ahead of by ensuring that our police, that our security agencies, that all our agencies have gauged at a state and federal level have the tools they need to make this stop.
We are committed to doing that. It is why we have brought this legislation into the Parliament. We will continue to engage with the opposition to seek their support for these measures, and I hope that they are able to support us in these efforts.”
Labor has kicked off question time by targeting the government over evidence from the Australian Federal Police commissioner Andrew Colvin on the Coalition’s proposed encryption bill.
In private evidence to the parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security, Colvin wrote: “The AFP is very concerned such a purpose-based approach would pose a variety of significant issues that would challenge the effectiveness of the regime and undermine the policy intent of the measures”.That quote found its way into a Simon Benson story in The Australian.
Labor is concerned whoever gave the material to Benson may have breached the Intelligence Services Act 2001 section 9 which makes it an offence to disclose or publish evidence or documents given to the committee in private. Penalty? Two years in the slammer!