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.
Morrison defends dumping energy policy despite Turnbull speech – question time live
Morrison defends dumping energy policy despite Turnbull speech – question time live
(35 minutes later)
On Monday Centre Alliance voted with the governmentto delay a scheduled vote on Labor’s bill to repeal religious exemptions that allow schools to discriminate against LGBT students.
The Reserve Bank has kept the official cash rate unchanged at 1.5%, again.
Today after question time there will be two motions on this issue: the government will try to send the bill to committee; and Labor’s Penny Wong will push for the bill to be voted on on Wednesday. It sounds like Centre Alliance could help the bill come to a vote this week.
The cash rate has been sitting at the same level since 3 August 2016.
Senator Rex Patricktold Guardian Australia:
To put that in perspective, the 2016 federal election (which Malcolm Turnbull helped to win for the federal Coalition with a personal $1.75m donation) was in July 2016.
“The 24 hours has provided us with clear air and has been very helpful. We are close to determining a position that might see a vote tomorrow.”
The Reserve Bank says forces emanating from the global economy are mixed.
Patrick said the party was still weighing “the right landing point” to ensure “no discrimination but with appropriate religious protections”
There are signs of a slowdown in global trade, partly stemming from ongoing trade tensions (read: US-China trade war), and growth in China has slowed a little, with Chinese authorities paying close attention to risks in their financial sector.
2018 House of Reps class photo @AmyRemeikis @murpharoo @GuardianAus #PoliticsLive https://t.co/OQvAblZlh3 pic.twitter.com/6OKT9Tt6TX
In Australia, business conditions are currently positive and higher levels of public infrastructure are supporting the economy, as is growth in resource exports.
The class of 2018 - Auspic have captured some group photos of Members of the House of Representatives in the 45th Parliament. pic.twitter.com/1DEZaoP3l8
However, wages are not growing much, household debt levels are high and house prices have declined. It means the outlook for household consumption is uncertain.
Rebehka Sharkie to Michael McCormack:
The RBA says the outlook for Australia’s labour market remains “positive” with the unemployment rate at 5%, the lowest in six years. Unemployment is expected to continue falling in coming years. The ongoing improvement in the economy is also likely to see wages pick up eventually, though the process will be slow.
There have been three deaths in Mayo in the last fortnight. South Australia has 7% of the nation’s population. South Australia received supplementary road funding which was cut by the Abbot government in 2014. Centre Alliance successfully negotiated with the Turnbull government to reinstate $40 million’ supplementary road funding over two years but that will end in June 20 19. Will you commit to extending the road funding beyond June 2019 so we can have an equitable share of the federal road funding?”
However, conditions in the housing markets in Sydney and Melbourne are continuing to “ease”, and nationwide measures of rent inflation remain low. Borrowers are finding it harder to secure credit from banks, with some lenders having a “reduced appetite to lend.” The demand for credit by investors in the housing market has slowed “noticeably.” And growth in credit to owner-occupiers has slowed to an annual 5-6%.
McCormack talks about wanting to bring all road deaths to zero and says the government will consider it.
Mortgage rates remain low, and banks are competing for borrowers with higher grade credit.
That gives him another three minutes to Michael McCormack the chamber on road funding.
Economists say it appears as though the RBA is becoming increasingly cautious, particularly due to conditions in the housing market.
In Senate question time Labor’s Kimberley Kitching has asked about this statement in November from Scott Morrison ruling out a change in leadership rules:
It means interest rates may not rise for another two years at least, and they may well have to drop at some stage, if circumstances demand it.
“John Howard also had this strong view and it is that we represent our elected members of Parliament, they go to Parliament and they elect who their leader is to run their Parliamentary party ... So we don’t have any plans to change our processes”
Brendan O’Connor is very much enjoying Barnaby Joyce and other Coalition MPs supporting traditional Labor policy against casualisation.
The finance minister Mathias Cormann explained the prime minister’s change of heart:
Joyce leads the committee O’Connor is talking about in his statement here. But this is a pretty big issue in regional and rural communities, and the Nationals tend to be a little more in lockstep with Labor on these issues when it comes to farm and land workers:
“The leadership team have had a number of conversations [to ensure] the Australian people can be confident if Scott Morrison is successful at the next election he will remain the prime minister until the election after that.”
In another example of a divided government, a parliamentary committee dominated by members of the Coalition has followed Labor’s lead on the serious need to deal with issues around casual work, labour hire and insecure work.
Kitching also noted that in August Morrison said “regulating for culture is never effective”.
The House Standing Committee on Innovation, Industry, Science and Resources identifies the challenges associated with insecure work, particularly the misuse and overuse of casuals and labour hire.
Bill Shorten comes back with some more Malcolm Turnbull. I don’t think Turnbull has ever been so popular in the chamber before.
As Labor leads on policies for decent jobs, higher wages and secure work, Scott Morrison is stuck dealing with his divided and dysfunctional government as the government members break away from his stance on industrial relations.
Shorten:
The Coalition committee members must now do more than simply pay lip service to these issues and urge Scott Morrison to put workers first for once. For five years now, this government has done nothing for workers.
Does the current Prime Minister agree with the recently retired former Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, who said today, there’s never been a national energy policy that has had more universal support than the national energy guarantee? And why won’t the Prime Minister implement a national energy guarantee with his own energy targets?
Labor won’t be surprised if the Coalition members of the committee use this report to say one thing in their electorates pretending they care, and yet do absolutely nothing in Canberra. We’ve seen this again and again with the member for Dawson, George Christensen.
Scott Morrison: (while the backbench pretend to be interested)
Labor doesn’t want to wait until Scott Morrison calls an election to ensure workers are treated fairly, we want action now.
The Leader of theOpposition may not be aware that the former Prime Minister has just tweeted, ‘I have not endorsed Labor’s energy policy. Labor have not demonstrated that their 45%emissions reduction target will not push up prices’. That’s what the former Prime Minister said, and he is absolutely right. Labor have not and they cannot demonstrate that their reckless 45% economy wrecking, as the Business Council has said, emissions reduction target of 45% will not increase power prices, because of course it will increase power prices. Our target of 26% has been clear for years. It is unchanged. The whole purpose of the design of the original national energy guarantee...
The cause of Liberal senator Jim Molan – who has fallen to an unwinnable spot on the Senate ticket – has been taken up by an unlikely supporter. In Senate question time
Shorten:
Labor’s Malarndirri McCarthy asked why Scott Morrison intervened to save Craig Kelly’s preselection but not Molan’s.
“On direct relevance. I asked thePrime Minister about former Prime Minister Turnbull’s comments on the national energy guarantee, and then I asked him, why won’t the Prime Minister implement them with his own emissions targets? The Prime Minister has studiously avoided dealing with Prime Minister Turnbull’s comments on the Neg.”
Mathias Cormann:
Morrison (effectively)
The prime minister holds Molan in very high regard, he has regular meetings with Senator Molan. The breaking news is that Labor is preparing to write a reference for Senator Molan ... Labor doesn’t quite understand how democracy works. Senator Molan is an endorsed Liberal candidate at the next election.”
We have targets and we are meeting targets and we will smash Kyoto 2.
Cormann suggested that if Labor is so keen to see Molan re-elected it should join the Coalition and help get four Liberal candidates elected in New South Wales.
“We will meet our 2030 target, Mr Speaker”.
Molan is laughing, he seems to appreciate the cut and thrust of Senate question time even if this is a very live and awkward issue for the Liberal party.
Ummm, I interject to say, no, it doesn’t actually, on the facts, look like we will be meeting our 2030 targets. As Greg Jericho reports:
Claire O’Neil to Stuart Robert, following on from Latika Bourke’s story:
On Friday the government released the latest quarterly greenhouse gas emissions figures. For once the government did not try to bury the news, but they certainly were not eager to highlight the figures which show that our emissions continue to rise and that we are nowhere near a path towards reaching our Paris commitment to reduce emissions by 26% from 2005 level by 2030.
The assistant treasurer ... is responsible for financial services, including the big banks. Can the assistant treasurer confirmed that, instead of cracking down on misconduct in the banking sector, he voted against the royal commission 26 times? And how it he is now exploiting the victims of the bank misconduct by using the royal commission as an excuse to raise funds for the Liberal party?
The way the government releases greenhouse gas emissions data gives a pretty good insight into the low regard they have for the issue of climate change.”
Christopher Pyne:
Andrew Gee provides the runway for more Michael McCormack.
I think the phraseology of the member for Hotham should be withdrawn. It was a slur on the assistant treasurer, and the second half of the question is not within the assistant treasurer’s responsibilities, and therefore it’s not in order.
Excuse me while I go make a cup of tea.
Tony Burke:
And Scott Morrison answers with this:
The question go directly to the use of the minister’s ministerial authority and the role that he has with financial services. They refer to him using that office, with respect to the royal commission, quite specifically for a fundraiser. This has also appeared online as an article … Quite simply, what the question asks is whether or not he has used his ministerial authority in this way instead of looking after the victims of the banks.”
The policy that was being pursued by the government did not include a 45% emissions reduction target. As a result, Mr Speaker, when we pursued this policy, it was not with the policy being suggested by the Labor party.
Pyne again says it is a slur.
“The Labor party refuses to be honest with the Australian people, that a 45% emissions reduction target, which is the centrepiece of their national energy guarantee, a 45% emissions reduction target that will wipe-out smelting industries, that will wipe out steel industries, Mr Speaker, which will wipe out agriculture...
Tony Smith rules the first part of the question is in order, but he is uncomfortable with the language of the second.
“... Which of these industries will go first under the Labor party with their economy-wrecking 45% emissions reduction target?
Robert immediately launches into answering the part of the question which was ruled out of order.
“The Business Council of Australia made it pretty clear, the emissions target of 26%, they said, that’s their words, if you’d like to reread it for them ... The emissions target of 26% reduction is achievable. That’s what we’re doing and that’s what we’re committed to.
Smith: “If the assistant minister wants to refer to the matter is that I’ve ruled out of order, I don’t think that’s a good idea … I ruled them out of order quite deliberately because of their language, and because of the motives or the improper motives that are implied.”
“They said a 45% emissions reduction target is, I quote, an economy-wrecking target, Mr Speaker. That’s what the Labor party is proposing if their elected. Make no mistake, if the Labor party is elected, they are promoting and proposing dramatic and wide scale changes to the economy of this country.
Robert: “This is the government that instituted the banking royal commission.
“They are looking to change it all, Mr Speaker, when it comes to the economic management of this country. That is exactly what they did back in 2007. In 2007, they pretended to be fiscal conservatives, and we all know that that was a big fat lie, Mr Speaker, and they sought to hoodwink the Australian people back in 2007.
“... What this government has done is legion.”
“Following the election of the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government at that time, they pursued reckless economic policies that drove the budget into deficit, which drove the economy to its brink, Mr Speaker.
I am not making this up.
“For the last period we’ve cleaned up their wreckage. Next April we will bring surplus for the first time in more than a decade because of sensible, rational economic policies. The Labor party wants to put up taxes. More than $200bn worth of higher taxes on the Australian economy.
Chris Bowen to Scott Morrison:
“That will throw a wet blanket on jobs, Mr Speaker, and it will drive up the cost of living for Australians, whether they’re pensioners, mums and dads, paying school fees or just trying to get ahead, Mr Speaker. The Labor party is proposing radical change to the economic management of this country and that spells a weaker economy and higher taxes under the Labor party.”
Does he deny reports that a significant delegation of government members urged the government to abandon its discredited divestments policy, including the member for Curtain and Reed and McMillan? Given the Prime Minister has already turned his bigstick into a toothpick, will he now abandon his discredited divestments laws which even his own members do not support?
The Rudd-Gillard-Rudd attack was much more effective when it wasn’t Abbott-Tunbull-Morrison.
Morrison (again in the key of LOUDEST NOISE POSSIBLE)
As Bill Shorten asks this:
“That’s something coming from the biggest wet newspaper in the parliament, Mr Speaker.”
Does the current prime minister agree with the previous prime minister Malcolm Turnbull, who said today about the national energy guarantee, and I quote, there was a minority of Coalition MPs who effectively torpedoed what was fundamentally a very good technology agnostic energy policy which united climate and energy policy and would enable us to bring prices and keep the lights on.
(This may be the lamest burn I have ever heard in my life.)
Turnbull tweeted this:
“This is a form of Blue Steel, with his sharp suits and his slick look, swaggering around the electorate... Measuring up the curtains to the treasure’s suite, thinking he’s already there.
I have not endorsed “Labor’s energy policy”. They have adopted the NEG mechanism ✔️ but have not demonstrated that their 45% emissions reduction target will not push up prices. I encouraged all parties to stick with Coalition’s NEG which retains wide community support.
Mr Speaker, this is a shadow treasurer that, when he was treasurer, was presiding over economic wreckage and a budget that was forever in deficit.
Bert van Manen gets the first dixer and Scott Morrison is very happy to talk about how great the government is.
That was his form when he was treasurer of this country, but we know he had a few other jobs when he was in government. He had a few other jobs, Mr Speaker, and I’ll come back to those after I’ve had the opportunity to address what the member has addressed. Our government is supporting tough new laws to ensure that the big electricity companies are held to account, and we would call on the Labor Party when those laws are introduced to support them, and to do so this week, and failure to do so will tell every single electricity customer in Australia today that the Labor Party is for higher electricity prices and letting the big electricity companies off the hook.
We get a reminder that Peter Dutton is still on medical leave and then get straight into it.
Our government is united, Mr Speaker, on the issue of getting electricity prices down.
Bill Shorten to Scott Morrison:
In standing up to for Australians against higher electricity bills. We are united on the point of ensuring those big electricity companies are held to account for what they do to Australian customers. That’s what we will be bringing to this house, and you’ll have plenty of opportunity, and my challenge to the Labor Party is this - whose side are you on? Australia’s electricity customers, who want lower prices, or the electricity companies who want to take the money for themselves?”
Does the current prime minister agree, with the recently retired former prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, who said today about the national energy guarantee, and I quote, ‘it was a vital piece of economic policy. It had strong support, and none stronger, I might say, than that of the current prime minister and current treasurer’.”
Question: Can you be “union bred, led and fed” if you are also on the side of big power?
Angus Taylor takes a dixer answer where he forces himself to say:
“As we said today, this week we will introduce our big stick legislation.”
Labor goes nuts.
Ged Kearney to Scott Morrison:
Why does the prime minister always choose the worst and weakest policy option on climate change? Is it because, as Malcolm Turnbull has said, there is a significant percentage of his government that does not believe climate change is real. Is this why Malcolm Turnbull is no longer prime minister?
Morrison: (who is back to being Shouty McShoutface, but only because he is shouting for you)
“The weakest and worst option for the Australian economy is the Australian Labour Party. That is the weakest and worst option, MrSpeaker, and I can advise the house...
“And I can advise the house that is based on their form, when they’ve been in government, Mr Speaker.
“Captain Risky when it comes to the Australian economy over here, Mr Speaker. The risk of the Labor party poses to our economy puts all of what we’re able to achieve, in terms of funding for the essential services that Australians rely on, Mr Speaker, in doubt. I noticed the hubris I’m hearing from the Member for Eden-Monaro –
“He thinks it is over but I can assure the Member for Eden-Monaro that you are in for a big fight.
“The Australian people do not want $200 billion of higher taxes on them in the mortgage belt of Queanbeyan and not the south coast of New South Wales. Those retirees throughout your electorate who you are going to rip thousands of dollars from out of their pockets, Mr Speaker.
“The member for Eden-Monaro is a risk to his own constituents when it comes to the taxes he seeks to impose on them, Mr Speaker. I can assure the Labor party members opposite that on this side of the house, we’re going to fight for a stronger economy, we’re going to fight for lower taxes, Mr Speaker, we’re going to fight for small and family businesses, we’re going to fight for mums and dads, we’re going to fight for those Australians who haven’t got the time to go around and get on Twitter and turn up at protests, Mr Speaker.
“We’re going to fight for the Australians who are out there putting their kids through school. Running their businesses, Mr Speaker, getting their kids educated, ensuring they’re supporting their communities and running their sporting organisations, Mr Speaker. That’s what we’re fighting for, Mr Speaker.”
Please read this in LOUD NOISES
Tanya Plibersek to Scott Morrison:
Malcolm Turnbull said today about ‘the national energy guarantee, it’s been abandoned by the federal government, I regret that, naturally, as indeed I think just about everyone in the federal government’. Does the prime minister also regret abandoning his own national energy guarantee, which he promised would bring down power prices?”
Morrison:
Morrison:
The proposal, Mr Speaker, that was considered by the government that the former prime minister had brought to cabinet, and had been considered by that government, had a 26% emissions reduction target, a 26% emissions reduction target.
Please refer to the previous answers.
“What the Labor party is proposing is to legislate to make law a 45% emissions reduction target. This side of the house do not support a 45% emissions reduction fund get, which is part of the Labor party’s plan.
Meanwhile, in the Senate, Mathias Cormann seems to be thanking the Greens and Kristina Keneally appears to be agreeing with Cormann:
“They might like to dress up their 45% emissions reduction target as a national energy guarantee, but what it is is a 45% emissions reduction target, which is a thumping big electricity tax, Mr Speaker. It will force up electricity prices, whether you’re a pensioner, householder, raising kids, small or family business, Labor’s policies will meanAustralians will pay more.
In Senate #qt @MathiasCormann tells the Greens “You voted with the Liberal & National Senators against Labor’s CPRS. If you hadn’t, it would have been very hard for us to unscramble that egg.”
“They will pay more in taxes, more for their electricity and private health insurance. They will pay more under what Labor is proposing because Labor only thing the only way to run a government is to make everything cost more, to put your taxes up, Mr Speaker.
“You know why they do that? Because they don’t know how to run a strong economy, they don’t know how to manage a budget. That’s their history every time they get into government and the people know it. They know the leader of the Labor party and all of the Labor party members cannot manage money, and they cannot manage a budget and that’s why they can’t be trusted in government to run a budget. Because if you can’t run a budget, you can’t run an economy, you can’t guarantee essential services.”
Tony Burke interrupts to say Morrison has spent two minutes talking about the Labor party but did not actually answer the question.
Morrison continues, but does not answer the question.
Question time is about to begin.
It is time for Who’s that MP – and it is Craig Kelly.
This seems a very bad idea no matter how you look at it – Latika Bourke from Fairfax reports Stuart Robert plans on headlining a Liberal party fundraiser about … the banking royal commission.
From Bourke’s report:
Assistant Treasurer Stuart Robert will headline a Liberal Party fundraiser that promises political donors an insight into the government’s potential response to the banking royal commission.
“The lunch, hosted by Liberal National Party backbencher Andrew Wallace, has been slammed by Labor as a crass attempt to capitalise on an explosive probe the Coalition had long opposed.”
We could save you some money.
The government voted against it almost 30 times, then were forced into it after the National party began to revolt. Then the banks, trying to end the endless bad publicity, called on the government to call one.
And then we got the Hayne review.
The three stages of not being able to catch a break
So to pass the divesture legislation, the government needs two more votes.
Bob Katter would be a yes. But they need one more crossbencher to come across to pass the legislation.
The committee looking at increasing Asis officers’ use of force have tabled its report:
The committee supported the two main aims of the bill which were to:
enable the minister to specify additional persons outside Australia who may be protected by an Asis staff member or agent, and
provide that an Asis staff member or agent performing specified activities outside Australia will be able to use reasonable and necessary force in the performance of an Asis function.
enable the minister to specify additional persons outside Australia who may be protected by an Asis staff member or agent, and
provide that an Asis staff member or agent performing specified activities outside Australia will be able to use reasonable and necessary force in the performance of an Asis function.
In its report the committee noted the extensive consultation process that Asis undertook with the inspector general of intelligence and security (Igis) in the drafting of the bill.
In judging the legitimacy reasonableness and transparency — including appropriate oversight — of the bill the committee had regard to the:
comprehensive consultation and decision making process that must be undertaken by the minister before authorising the use of these powers,
guidelines surrounding the use of these powers, and
oversight provided by referral of these guidelines to the Igis and this committee.
comprehensive consultation and decision making process that must be undertaken by the minister before authorising the use of these powers,
guidelines surrounding the use of these powers, and
oversight provided by referral of these guidelines to the Igis and this committee.
The committee noted that the oversight requirements in the bill replicate existing oversight requirements and provide an appropriate level of transparency recognising the necessary sensitivities of Asis activities.
The committee was satisfied with the provisions contained in the bill and recommended that the intelligence services amendment bill 2018 be passed.
The PJCIS chair, Mr Andrew Hastie MP, said the tabling of this report is an example of the non-partisan and consultative manner in which the committee are able to scrutinise national security legislation.
Further information about the inquiry can be accessed via the committee’s website at http://www.aph.gov.au/pjcis.
Mike Bowers has also had some fun with the light in the press gallery today.
John Howard gets a library, as seen by Mike Bowers.
