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/2019/oct/14/coalition-labor-morrison-albanese-lambie-politics-live
The article has changed 22 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 18 | Version 19 |
|---|---|
| Morrison's 'negative globalism' speech was 'disturbing', Penny Wong says – politics live | Morrison's 'negative globalism' speech was 'disturbing', Penny Wong says – politics live |
| (32 minutes later) | |
| Zali Steggall on her inclusion on the (latest) family law inquiry: | |
| I am very pleased to have been confirmed on the family law inquiry. | |
| Relationship breakdowns are a highly emotional time and this inquiry needs to be balanced and handled sensitively to ensure our family law system works the best way possible in all areas, both in property and parenting disputes. | |
| Pauline Hanson has been promised the deputy chair role in that family law inquiry. | Pauline Hanson has been promised the deputy chair role in that family law inquiry. |
| Here is how she has been promoting her involvement: | Here is how she has been promoting her involvement: |
| The joint select committee into Australia’s family law system has just been announced – the House members anyway. They are: | The joint select committee into Australia’s family law system has just been announced – the House members anyway. They are: |
| Kevin Andrews | Kevin Andrews |
| Llew O’Brien | Llew O’Brien |
| Fiona Martin | Fiona Martin |
| Zali Steggall | Zali Steggall |
| For the Greens motion to be successful they would need both Centre Alliance and Jacqui Lambie to vote to shut the family law inquiry down. | For the Greens motion to be successful they would need both Centre Alliance and Jacqui Lambie to vote to shut the family law inquiry down. |
| At this stage Centre Alliance’s Rex Patrick is holding the line that Pauline Hanson’s public comments about domestic violence don’t invalidate the whole process. | At this stage Centre Alliance’s Rex Patrick is holding the line that Pauline Hanson’s public comments about domestic violence don’t invalidate the whole process. |
| He told Guardian Australia: | He told Guardian Australia: |
| “I often strongly disagree* with remarks Pauline Hanson makes, but I respect that she is a member of the Senate and was voted for by a number of people. Her remarks taint her own reputation, they will have no effect on the committee itself, which is made up of 10 parliamentarians.” | “I often strongly disagree* with remarks Pauline Hanson makes, but I respect that she is a member of the Senate and was voted for by a number of people. Her remarks taint her own reputation, they will have no effect on the committee itself, which is made up of 10 parliamentarians.” |
| *An earlier version of this post had an unfortunate typo. Rex Patrick often strongly disagrees with Pauline Hanson, not agrees, as I first had. Sorry. | *An earlier version of this post had an unfortunate typo. Rex Patrick often strongly disagrees with Pauline Hanson, not agrees, as I first had. Sorry. |
| We have a statement from the joint security and intelligence committee: | We have a statement from the joint security and intelligence committee: |
| Today the Chair of the Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee tabled its Advisory report on the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (2019 Measures No. 1) Bill 2019. | Today the Chair of the Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee tabled its Advisory report on the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (2019 Measures No. 1) Bill 2019. |
| The Chair of the Committee, Mr Andrew Hastie MP said “This Bill makes changes that are designed to keep Australians safe. It implements a COAG agreement to ensure a presumption that neither bail nor parole will be granted to those persons who have demonstrated support for, or who have links to, terrorist activity. This decision followed the terrorist attack in Brighton, Victoria in June 2017. The perpetrator of that attack was on parole for State offences, and had previously been charged with conspiracy to commit a terrorist attack.” | The Chair of the Committee, Mr Andrew Hastie MP said “This Bill makes changes that are designed to keep Australians safe. It implements a COAG agreement to ensure a presumption that neither bail nor parole will be granted to those persons who have demonstrated support for, or who have links to, terrorist activity. This decision followed the terrorist attack in Brighton, Victoria in June 2017. The perpetrator of that attack was on parole for State offences, and had previously been charged with conspiracy to commit a terrorist attack.” |
| The Bill: | The Bill: |
| amends the existing presumption against bail in section 15AA of the Crimes Act so that it covers persons charged with or convicted of a terrorism offence, | amends the existing presumption against bail in section 15AA of the Crimes Act so that it covers persons charged with or convicted of a terrorism offence, |
| amends section 19AG of the Crimes Act to require a court, when sentencing a terrorist offender who is under the age of 18, to fix a non-parole period of three-quarters of the head sentence unless the court is satisfied that exceptional circumstances exist to justify a shorter non-parole period, and | amends section 19AG of the Crimes Act to require a court, when sentencing a terrorist offender who is under the age of 18, to fix a non-parole period of three-quarters of the head sentence unless the court is satisfied that exceptional circumstances exist to justify a shorter non-parole period, and |
| provides that exculpatory material does not need to be included in a continuing detention order application where the material would be the subject of a claim for Public Interest Immunity. | provides that exculpatory material does not need to be included in a continuing detention order application where the material would be the subject of a claim for Public Interest Immunity. |
| amends the existing presumption against bail in section 15AA of the Crimes Act so that it covers persons charged with or convicted of a terrorism offence, | amends the existing presumption against bail in section 15AA of the Crimes Act so that it covers persons charged with or convicted of a terrorism offence, |
| amends section 19AG of the Crimes Act to require a court, when sentencing a terrorist offender who is under the age of 18, to fix a non-parole period of three-quarters of the head sentence unless the court is satisfied that exceptional circumstances exist to justify a shorter non-parole period, and | amends section 19AG of the Crimes Act to require a court, when sentencing a terrorist offender who is under the age of 18, to fix a non-parole period of three-quarters of the head sentence unless the court is satisfied that exceptional circumstances exist to justify a shorter non-parole period, and |
| provides that exculpatory material does not need to be included in a continuing detention order application where the material would be the subject of a claim for Public Interest Immunity. | provides that exculpatory material does not need to be included in a continuing detention order application where the material would be the subject of a claim for Public Interest Immunity. |
| The Committee has recommended amendments so that the onus is on the Australian Federal Police Minister to satisfy the Court that any excluded exculpatory information is protected by Public Interest Immunity. This addresses the concerns raised by submitters whilst ensuring that the intended aim of the amendment is achieved. | The Committee has recommended amendments so that the onus is on the Australian Federal Police Minister to satisfy the Court that any excluded exculpatory information is protected by Public Interest Immunity. This addresses the concerns raised by submitters whilst ensuring that the intended aim of the amendment is achieved. |
| The Greens will be moving a motion to dissolve the Kevin Andrews chaired inquiry into the family law system. | The Greens will be moving a motion to dissolve the Kevin Andrews chaired inquiry into the family law system. |
| From Larissa Waters: | From Larissa Waters: |
| The Greens will introduce a motion in the Senate today to dissolve the damaging Joint Select Committee Inquiry into Australia’s Family Law System, for vote tomorrow. | The Greens will introduce a motion in the Senate today to dissolve the damaging Joint Select Committee Inquiry into Australia’s Family Law System, for vote tomorrow. |
| Greens co-deputy leader and spokesperson on women, Senator Larissa Waters, said the inquiry was already ramping up the risk to women and children. | Greens co-deputy leader and spokesperson on women, Senator Larissa Waters, said the inquiry was already ramping up the risk to women and children. |
| ‘Australia’s family law system has serious problems which need addressing, however this inquiry is politically motivated and should not go ahead,’ she said. | ‘Australia’s family law system has serious problems which need addressing, however this inquiry is politically motivated and should not go ahead,’ she said. |
| ‘The Greens are in discussion with other parties and with Senators who may have changed their minds about supporting this inquiry, which is stacked with extremists that have pre-determined, non-expert opinions on violence against women and their children. | ‘The Greens are in discussion with other parties and with Senators who may have changed their minds about supporting this inquiry, which is stacked with extremists that have pre-determined, non-expert opinions on violence against women and their children. |
| ‘There are serious concerns from experts, service providers and women in the community that the inquiry will make women less safe, and that victims and survivors of family violence and abuse do not feel safe giving evidence to the inquiry.’ | ‘There are serious concerns from experts, service providers and women in the community that the inquiry will make women less safe, and that victims and survivors of family violence and abuse do not feel safe giving evidence to the inquiry.’ |
| Speaking of the Senate, Arthur Sinodonos will deliver his Senate valedictory speech on Wednesday afternoon. He’s off to be our man in Washington. | Speaking of the Senate, Arthur Sinodonos will deliver his Senate valedictory speech on Wednesday afternoon. He’s off to be our man in Washington. |
| Malcolm Roberts, the servant of Queensland and the nation, is now refusing to vote on government bills in the Senate, as part of a One Nation standoff to have the dairy industry regulated. | Malcolm Roberts, the servant of Queensland and the nation, is now refusing to vote on government bills in the Senate, as part of a One Nation standoff to have the dairy industry regulated. |
| Roberts just said this in the Senate: | Roberts just said this in the Senate: |
| As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I want to make comments on the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation Amendment bill 2019. Let me first say that in support of Senator Hanson’s decision to not vote on legislation, other than critical legislation, until the government has addressed the plight of dairy farmers, I will not be voting on this bill. | As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I want to make comments on the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation Amendment bill 2019. Let me first say that in support of Senator Hanson’s decision to not vote on legislation, other than critical legislation, until the government has addressed the plight of dairy farmers, I will not be voting on this bill. |
| Pauline Hanson has announced the vote ban will apply to “non-critical legislation” but I guess PHON will decide what is critical and what is not. | Pauline Hanson has announced the vote ban will apply to “non-critical legislation” but I guess PHON will decide what is critical and what is not. |
| To pass legislation Labor and the Greens disagree on, the government needs four of the six Senate crossbenchers to pass legislation. Usually that’s Cory Berardi and One Nation, and then either Centre Alliance or Jacqui Lambie. | To pass legislation Labor and the Greens disagree on, the government needs four of the six Senate crossbenchers to pass legislation. Usually that’s Cory Berardi and One Nation, and then either Centre Alliance or Jacqui Lambie. |
| Without One Nation, Centre Alliance AND Lambie become crucial. | Without One Nation, Centre Alliance AND Lambie become crucial. |
| But again, we don’t know what counts as non-critical legislation. | But again, we don’t know what counts as non-critical legislation. |
| On the speech Penny Wong delivered to the Australian Institute of International Affairs, which, for her, was quite political, Wong had this to say: | On the speech Penny Wong delivered to the Australian Institute of International Affairs, which, for her, was quite political, Wong had this to say: |
| I thought very carefully about this speech. As you would know, it is not usual for me to have such political attack in a foreign speech. I talked about strategic composition in the region and I focused on foreign policy with some criticism but this was considered because I do think that, whether you look at his most recent speech at the Lowy Institute, where he rails against negative globalism, his decision on Jerusalem, where he sought to walk away from a bipartisan position on Jerusalem when he first became prime minister, when you look at his language on China, this is a prime minister who is prepared to play domestic politics and domestic political tactics and foreign policy in a way I have not seen. | I thought very carefully about this speech. As you would know, it is not usual for me to have such political attack in a foreign speech. I talked about strategic composition in the region and I focused on foreign policy with some criticism but this was considered because I do think that, whether you look at his most recent speech at the Lowy Institute, where he rails against negative globalism, his decision on Jerusalem, where he sought to walk away from a bipartisan position on Jerusalem when he first became prime minister, when you look at his language on China, this is a prime minister who is prepared to play domestic politics and domestic political tactics and foreign policy in a way I have not seen. |
| The Lowy speech was interesting and disturbing. Disturbing because it was lightweight but also because it broke from Julie Bishop’s white paper. | The Lowy speech was interesting and disturbing. Disturbing because it was lightweight but also because it broke from Julie Bishop’s white paper. |
| The one [plan] the government had was a rules-based order and [to] work multilaterally in our region to achieve that and we have an Australian prime minister doing what really no prime minister has done, of either persuasion, which is railing against global cooperation at a time when we need it. | The one [plan] the government had was a rules-based order and [to] work multilaterally in our region to achieve that and we have an Australian prime minister doing what really no prime minister has done, of either persuasion, which is railing against global cooperation at a time when we need it. |
| You cannot be an isolationist and free trader. He claims he wants free trade, more trade, but he does not like multilateral institutions, which presumably include the World Trade Organisation which is critical to Australia. | You cannot be an isolationist and free trader. He claims he wants free trade, more trade, but he does not like multilateral institutions, which presumably include the World Trade Organisation which is critical to Australia. |
| On Peter Dutton’s comments on the Chinese Communist party, Penny Wong says: | On Peter Dutton’s comments on the Chinese Communist party, Penny Wong says: |
| I would like to make a couple of points. We are different society to China under the Chinese Communist party. And I have made the point for quite a long time. And inevitably with our democracy [we] will have differences of views on a range of issues between us and China. | I would like to make a couple of points. We are different society to China under the Chinese Communist party. And I have made the point for quite a long time. And inevitably with our democracy [we] will have differences of views on a range of issues between us and China. |
| My question to Peter Dutton is – was [it] a thought-through plan? Was it part of the clear strategy or part of a political tactic because ...it’s very difficult to tell where the government’s strategy on China is. | My question to Peter Dutton is – was [it] a thought-through plan? Was it part of the clear strategy or part of a political tactic because ...it’s very difficult to tell where the government’s strategy on China is. |
| If you accept that we are, as we are, an ally and partner of the US, and we have an important economic relationship with China, you want to make sure you have assessable strategy in dealing with [a] China which is much more assertive, but we are going to have differences of views on whether the relationship is more challenging. | If you accept that we are, as we are, an ally and partner of the US, and we have an important economic relationship with China, you want to make sure you have assessable strategy in dealing with [a] China which is much more assertive, but we are going to have differences of views on whether the relationship is more challenging. |
| ... Scott Morrison appeared to downplay it so it does look from the outside like another tactically domestically focused press conference. | ... Scott Morrison appeared to downplay it so it does look from the outside like another tactically domestically focused press conference. |
| ... Of course it matters how you handle the relationship as well as what decisions you make. This is not just about substance. That is important. But it’s also about how you handle rhetoric and advocacy. | ... Of course it matters how you handle the relationship as well as what decisions you make. This is not just about substance. That is important. But it’s also about how you handle rhetoric and advocacy. |
| But my concern is, we don’t appear to have a plan when it comes to dealing with an increasingly challenging relationship with China, which is becoming more assertive and more willing to present interests. There will be times when we our interests converge, and we will engage closely, but times where our interests are different. | But my concern is, we don’t appear to have a plan when it comes to dealing with an increasingly challenging relationship with China, which is becoming more assertive and more willing to present interests. There will be times when we our interests converge, and we will engage closely, but times where our interests are different. |