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/22/nationals-under-pressure-over-drought-response-politics-live
The article has changed 20 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 9 | Version 10 |
|---|---|
| Nationals under pressure over drought response – politics live | Nationals under pressure over drought response – politics live |
| (32 minutes later) | |
| Dan Tehan is taking a dixer, but he has so far spent most of it addressing the backbench, meaning no one can hear him, including the Speaker. | |
| Tanya Plibersek gets booted for an interjection. | |
| Labor is now yelling “through the chair” to Tehan. I have no idea what he is speaking about, because no one can hear him. | |
| “Do you want an extension, mate,” Anthony Albanese yells. | |
| It’s all going really, really well. | |
| Oh, it turns out that the member for Curtin’s eldest son is doing his final exams. This is what the dixer is apparently about. | |
| Tehan is now talking about ‘rambling and having no idea’ and it seems like a pretty big self-own for a dixer. | |
| Catherine King to Scott Morrison: | |
| Can the Prime Minister confirm evidence at Senate estimates last night that his Government spent 190,000 on a plan to develop empathy for the inland rail project? Why is the Prime Minister spending taxpayer money on funded empathy while drought-stricken farm families are being thrown off the farm household allowance? | |
| Morrison gives Michael McCormack the call (excuse me while I call the UN): | |
| Mr Speaker, it is important to have empathy for rural communities and I understand we’re investing $9.3 billion in the inland rail. It’s a 1,700km corridor of commerce between Melbourne and Brisbane. The CSIRO, the report they did last year - I know it was predicated the building of this on a 10 saving on a tonne. But $76 average now. But it is going to impact upon farmers’ properties. | |
| We understand that, Mr Speaker. Indeed even in my electorate...there are farmers for who the inland rail is going to intersect their properties and insect their lives. Of course, we do need to obviously get out there and inform those people about their options. | |
| We do need to inform those people about what their options are as we construct this inland rail project which is creating already thousands of jobs, which is creating and going to create thousands of opportunities for those farmers to get their product to port, to make sure that we take advantage of the Free Trade Agreements that this government has been able to broker with South Korea, Japan, China, of course working on one with Indonesia, working on one with India. We want to get more farmers’ product to plate. We want to get more farmers’ product to port within 24 hours and that’s what the inland rail will do. But we’re asked about advertising that is being spent on campaigns. | |
| McCormack has grabbed a big photocopy of ‘big Labor waste’ | |
| He then refers to it, but looks like he has opened it to the wrong page. | |
| Sure. Red for you over there. That’s red for you red raggers over there. Absolutely red for you red raggers over there. You bunch of socialists, but there’s $69.5 million wasted on the carbon tax. How did that work for you? How did the carbon tax work for you? Then there was Julia Gillard, the Prime Minister ..on running a blog that no-one even commented on...” | |
| The House explodes. | |
| There are a million points of orders, but none of them are relevant and we are all begging to move on. | |
| This is the equivalent of being allowed into the fancy dining room, and then learning they serve Deb powered mash potato. | |
| Joel Fitzgibbon to Scott Morrison: | |
| Can the Prime Minister confirm that his Government has kicked 600 farming families off the farm household allowance as the drought worsens? And will kick another 500 families off the payment by Christmas? | |
| Morrison: | |
| Mr Speaker, I refer the member to the statement we made last week and I’ll invite the minister to add to my remarks if he would like to. And that was to add an additional supplement for those who are coming off after their four years to receive a payment of $13,000 for family, Mr Speaker. And as we have always done in our response to the drought, Mr Speaker, they are receiving $13,000, Mr Speaker, once the four years has been concluded and what our Government will continue to do, as we have done all the way through this drought and as the minister rightly calls it, as the drought steps up another level, then we step up another level. | |
| We will continue to monitor this issue very closely, Mr Speaker, and as on each occasion we have responded to the advice, we have received on the farm household allowance, remembering - remembering it started at three years forever. | |
| That was the policy setting that we inherited. Farm household allowance was three years and that’s all you got forever. We increased that to four years and then we increased it to four years in every 10, and now, Mr Speaker, at the end of those four years we said we’ll also add in a further supplementary payment of $13,000 like we said we did last year when we added an additional $12,000 to the payment they were already receiving as part of the step-up of our drought response. | |
| So on each and every occasion, as the drought has continued, we have continued to step up our response as the step-up has required, and, Mr Speaker, that is why I have said and those opposite have lampooned, the idea that - it is the first call and it is the biggest call on the pressures of our budget, as we consider the issues whether we go into the MYEFO period of next year’s budget. The first call - the first thing I’m going to sure is addressed is to meeting the needs of our drought support programs, Mr Speaker. That’s why they’re getting an extra $13,000. That’s why we’re prepared to provide that support to ensure that they continue to receive the financial assistance that they’re seeking. | |
| Josh Frydenberg is the latest to tell us how wonderful the economy and the budget is. | |
| Which is very similar to how my mother used to tell us her and dad were doing really well. Right before they announced their divorce. | |
| Meanwhile in Finance Estimates, Labor is having a crack at the government over its $7bn drought policy, saying the coalition has been misrepresenting the figure as money going to drought affected communities, when most of it is yet to be spent. | |
| In Finance estimates, Labor senator Jenny McAllister grilled Finance Minister Mathias Cormann over the claimed $7bn drought package, most of which is attributable to a $5bn future drought fund. | |
| The future drought fund begins making disbursements from next year and is designed for “future proofing” drought prone areas. | |
| “I don’t think it is honest to describe it as a $7bn drought policy,” McAllister said. | |
| “I am not sure if the prime minister is being honest about that.”Labor senator Tim Ayres said Morrison had taken the “ad man” approach in selling the drought package. | |
| Cormann defended the promotion of the drought package, saying the government was explaining the government’s approach appropriately. | |
| Rebekha Sharkie to Scott Morrison: | |
| As of July this year, Australia had just 27 days’ supply of automotive fuel physically in the country. This leaves us incredibly vulnerable. When will Australia increase our stocks to the recommended 90-day supply of automotive fuel physically held in the country? | |
| Angus Taylor takes it: | |
| Well, thank you, Mr Speaker. Well, although Australia hasn’t had a major fuel disruption for other 40 years, we are absolutely committed to continually enhancing the strength of our fuel security. With that in mind, we’re working very closely with the International Energy Agency to modernise the oil stockholding methodology which will take into account Australia’s unique geographic circumstances. | |
| Mr Speaker, our unique supply chain and based on that, during 2019, we have held an average of 85 days of stocks across the various fuel stocks, Mr Speaker. But we have also importantly commenced negotiations with the United States for a strategic petroleum reserve and that will not only boost our oil stock holdings, Mr Speaker, but it will also importantly put us in a position where we can work with other like-minded countries to deal with any disruption that might occur in the future, Mr Speaker. | |
| Now, we have been very deliberate with this very important topic and I’m glad that the member raised it. With the final liquid fuel security report due later this year, the review will help inform future decisions on this important topic. It will include any decisions around holding additional stocks off-shore, Mr Speaker. | |
| He then moves on to what Labor’s policy was during the election, because the party not in government is apparently relevant here. | |
| Meryl Swanson employs her radio presenter voice to deliver her question to Scott Morrison: | |
| The coordinator general for drought, major general Steven Day, delivered his final report in April to the Prime Minister. Why does the Prime Minister insist on keeping this important report a secret, despite the ongoing drought crisis in Australia? | |
| Morrison: | |
| The coordinator-general in undertaking that he did for us on drought has been informing all of the responses the Government has been making to that drought, Mr Speaker... [The goverment is] finalising it full response to that report and when we provide that response we’ll be releasing that report and that is not in the too distant future, Mr Speaker. | |
| What you will see when you - when you see that report, as you will see the extensive implementation of the issues that have been raised by the coordinator-general in informing the Government’s drought response. Now, that included, Mr Speaker, the coordinator-general bringing together early on in the piece the National Drought Summit. That summit which brought people together from all across the country, state and territory premiers and chief ministers, those from the agricultural sector, scientists and others involved, Mr Speaker, in Government agencies, all of which informing the Government’s response, those involved in the trucking industry and the freight industry, and, Mr Speaker, following that drought summit, one of the most important things we did very early on was upgrade and update the National Drought Agreement between the Commonwealth and the states and the territories. | |
| And what that set out, Mr Speaker, was ensuring that the management of animal welfare is addressed by the states and territories and of course the management of the welfare of farmers and rural communities is managed by the Commonwealth. That’s why we have moved to ensure that the farm household allowance now is the most generous it has been in its entire history, Mr Speaker. That includes ensuring that just over four years, a farming family would receive just - will receive $125,000 - $125,000 for each family over the course of being on the farm household allowance and in addition to that, Mr Speaker, we have relaxed the eligibility requirements so they would get that four out of every 10 years. | |
| We have invested in district communities all around the country affected by drought with a million dollars going into each of those shire councils to ensure that their economies are being supported and we’re keeping people in work, we can support those communities and their economy and wellbeing. Longer term, we have been investing in the resilience of Australia to future droughts where our investments in water infrastructure projects. $1.5 billion in 21 projects right now in grand funding, Mr Speaker and on top of that 3.5 billion over and above that investing in water, infrastructure to provide further resilience around the country. | |
| That’s also supported with research and science amongst the many things that are supported by the draw-down of the future drought fund. We have a response to drought and that comprehensive response, which is not set and forget, we will continue to add to, continues to be informed by the excellent work of the coordinator-general and I look forward to releasing that report along with the Government’s full response. | |
| Michael McCormack is delivering a dixer with the demeanor of someone who finds salt on boiled potatoes to be an extravagance. | |
| We get a dixer about how great the economy is, before moving on to Joel Fitzgibbon asking Scott Morrison: | |
| I refer him to the statement by the member for New England yesterday. He said, “If they want to work in a work bipartisan way, I’m not going to knock that.” Prime Minister, why won’t you listen to the member for New England and more importantly to farmers and rural communities and convene a cross-party drought cabinet to adequately respond to the growing drought crisis? | |
| Morrison: | |
| Mr Speaker, the members of the Labor Party who sit on this frontbench here can’t even operate functionally in a shadow cabinet, Mr Speaker. | |
| Tony Pasin begins pounding on his desk like this is the best thing he has ever heard in his life. | |
| Morrison: | |
| Let alone actually participate in an actual cabinet at the end of the day, Mr Speaker. We learned today - we learned today with Labor historian Troy Bramston, in an article in The Australian - a Labor frontbencher, a member of the shadow cabinet of which the Leader of the Opposition leads, Mr Speaker - I don’t know who it was but happy to take suggestions. I’m sure they’ll be made to journalists later, Mr Speaker. | |
| Albanese tries a point of order on relevance, but we move on | |
| Morrison: | |
| And the quote read from a Labor frontbencher referring to the Leader of the Opposition, “For a guy who wanted to be leader so bad and couldn’t wait to announce he was running for it less than 24 hours after the election, he does not know what to do with the job”, Mr Speaker. | |
| That is what the shadow frontbencher, whoever they are, says about this Leader of the Opposition and this Leader of the Opposition thinks he should be sitting in a cabinet making decisions on this side of the place. | |
| Now, Mr Speaker, to address the issue of drought, now this is a very serious issue - one in which the Government convened a National Drought Summit and sought to work on a bipartisan fashion at that time with the opposition and I recall the observations being made outside that drought summit by the very member who asked this question - even before he got inside the room, he was already attacking the future drought fund, Mr Speaker. | |
| Mr Speaker, if we’re going to work by - on a bipartisan basis on this issue, we have not seen the policies that the opposition might be suggesting, but equally I would say this - the response that we’re providing is comprehensive. It is dealing firstly with the assistance directly to farm households whether they be farmers or graziers or others, it is investing in the district communities that need the support to work through the drought and provide the resilience for the future. Now, Mr Speaker, it is a serious issue and they have referred to the suggestion of a war cabinet. | |
| I remind them of the history - even when this nation was actually in war, Mr Speaker, there was not a war cabinet of the nature suggested by, Mr Speaker, the member who asked this question. I think it’s important that we will continue to consult widely as we do, listening, most importantly, to farmers and the rural districts who we will continue to work with, Mr Speaker. | |
| The only politics being played on drought are by those who sit opposite. | |
| Anthony Albanese asks Scott Morrison about his comment yesterday that politicians shouldn’t decide who is prosecuted in terms of media freedoms which is in contradiction to what Christian Porter has said, given the AG will have the final say on whether charges, if any, go ahead, once he has seen a brief from the commonwealth director of public prosecutions. | Anthony Albanese asks Scott Morrison about his comment yesterday that politicians shouldn’t decide who is prosecuted in terms of media freedoms which is in contradiction to what Christian Porter has said, given the AG will have the final say on whether charges, if any, go ahead, once he has seen a brief from the commonwealth director of public prosecutions. |
| Morrison says Albanese should have paid attention to his whole answer, | Morrison says Albanese should have paid attention to his whole answer, |
| There is a process, Mr Speaker, for the investigative authorities to look at these matters, to hand that over to prosecution authorities and then there is a process for the Attorney-General. But what the Leader of the Opposition wants to do is throw that all away and he wants to make the decision if he were Prime Minister about who gets prosecuted or who doesn’t even before those agencies, Mr Speaker, have even considered the matter. | There is a process, Mr Speaker, for the investigative authorities to look at these matters, to hand that over to prosecution authorities and then there is a process for the Attorney-General. But what the Leader of the Opposition wants to do is throw that all away and he wants to make the decision if he were Prime Minister about who gets prosecuted or who doesn’t even before those agencies, Mr Speaker, have even considered the matter. |
| What I said yesterday is exactly what I mean and that is no-one should go and be prosecuted, Mr Speaker, on the basis of what occupation they hold. The only basis upon which they should be prosecuted is if they have broken the law and I’ll ask the Attorney-General to add to the answer. | What I said yesterday is exactly what I mean and that is no-one should go and be prosecuted, Mr Speaker, on the basis of what occupation they hold. The only basis upon which they should be prosecuted is if they have broken the law and I’ll ask the Attorney-General to add to the answer. |
| Christian Porter: | Christian Porter: |
| Yes, so with respect to the question as to what would be the difference between a prosecution on the whim of a politician and the prosecution under consideration in the Smethurst matter, section 79 of the crimes act part of the Crimes Act actually embeds the requirement to come to the Attorney-General for consent. | Yes, so with respect to the question as to what would be the difference between a prosecution on the whim of a politician and the prosecution under consideration in the Smethurst matter, section 79 of the crimes act part of the Crimes Act actually embeds the requirement to come to the Attorney-General for consent. |
| What might a prosecution at the whim of a politician might look like. This would be the worst-case scenarioment an opposition leader who said yesterday that the government should shut a prosecution down, breaching the fundamental convention that you do not as a government tell the AFP to drop an investigation. And if that’s not remarkable enough, if that’s not remarkable enough, what is remarkable is who was the politician who actually called for the investigation in the first place? The Shadow Attorney?General was the politician! | What might a prosecution at the whim of a politician might look like. This would be the worst-case scenarioment an opposition leader who said yesterday that the government should shut a prosecution down, breaching the fundamental convention that you do not as a government tell the AFP to drop an investigation. And if that’s not remarkable enough, if that’s not remarkable enough, what is remarkable is who was the politician who actually called for the investigation in the first place? The Shadow Attorney?General was the politician! |
| A letter to the Prime Minister 29 April 2018. “I write with extreme concern. I’m sure I do not need to emphasise with you the gravity of such a security breach. It is, therefore, incumbent upon you to establish an investigation. I am deeply concerned that this national security leak is potentially the result of political tensions.” He sees the political advantage and pressures the AFP to start an investigation. He sees a political advantage in having it shut down. They call for the same investigation that they’re asking to be shut down in breach of the fundamental convention that the AFP remains independent. So they want to know what a prosecution at the whim of a politician might look like - it would look like what would happen if you ever got into government. | A letter to the Prime Minister 29 April 2018. “I write with extreme concern. I’m sure I do not need to emphasise with you the gravity of such a security breach. It is, therefore, incumbent upon you to establish an investigation. I am deeply concerned that this national security leak is potentially the result of political tensions.” He sees the political advantage and pressures the AFP to start an investigation. He sees a political advantage in having it shut down. They call for the same investigation that they’re asking to be shut down in breach of the fundamental convention that the AFP remains independent. So they want to know what a prosecution at the whim of a politician might look like - it would look like what would happen if you ever got into government. |
| Everyone is late today. | Everyone is late today. |
| But question time gets underway. | But question time gets underway. |
| And David Littleproud gets the walking in privileges with Scott Morrison again today. | And David Littleproud gets the walking in privileges with Scott Morrison again today. |
| In the chamber and it is now time for who’s that MP? | In the chamber and it is now time for who’s that MP? |
| It’s the new Jane Prentice - Julian Simmonds. | It’s the new Jane Prentice - Julian Simmonds. |