On that note, we will wrap up today.

For the next two days you will have some guest lead bloggers, as I attend to other work. I’ll be around though, and then you will be in very good hands and your news will continue as usual.

We will have all the news and fact checks and analysis you are not getting anywhere else tomorrow and Thursday (and beyond) so we hope to see you there. Thank you again to everyone who showed up today. It means the world.

Until then – remember it is is census night – and take care of you. Ax

We get this question which gets to the heart of the matter:

Given that you say we need higher unemployment to bring down inflation, at what level does the jobless rate become worrying to you?

Bullock:

Well, I don’t like people losing their jobs generally. It’s stressful for them, it’s stressful for their families. So… Thinking about employment, the point I would usually like to make up front, when we talk about seeing the forecasts for the unemployment rate rise, if you look at our forecasts, employment itself is still growing. 

So it’s not like massive – masses of people losing their job. Employment is still growing. But it just means that there are possibly less jobs available, it’s taking longer for people to find work and that sort of thing. If we can end up with a situation where the unemployment rate rises gradually up to 4.8, now people talk about the NIARU the non-inflation accelerating rate of unemployment, it’s not precise.

You start to think you don’t need unemployment that high to have inflation low and stable. Because that’s the whole point of our dual mandate, it’s to trying and maximise employment while being consistent with the inflation objective. So, so, you know, we – we have it rising because there’s tightness in the labour market and it’s contributing a bit to inflationary pressures. We’re trying to make sure we don’t have it rise more than it has to.

Unemployment is at 4.4%. Having it increase to 4.8% would see another 60,000 people unemployed.

So yes – to the naysayers – the RBA does want to see unemployment increased.

Sounds like a stupid question, but this is seriously what we are being told.

There is a duality here – Australians can’t really do anything which will change the major inflation drivers from overseas events, but also the RBA board is thinking that maybe Australians could do something in the future, maybe – and that has them worried and considering higher interest rates.

Bullock:

So, yes, we know that forecasts are inherently uncertain. We have to do it. We have to do our very best job at forecasting based on historical relationships and what we typical observe happening between various variables in the economy. But the fact is that it’s very difficult, we do our best. And when the facts change, when we get data that tell us things have changed, then we have to go and work out what that means for our forecasts. So, um, am I certain those forecasts will come out? No, I’m not certain. But what I do know is that when looking at the data, we’ll be reassesses our forecasts against those. If it turns out we think they’re wrong, we’ll change them and react with monetary policy accordingly.

Here is where Michele Bullock talks about there being too many people employed for the RBA’s comfort, without actually saying it:

I think we’re also still conscious that as I said, the labour market – notwithstanding it’s eased, it’s still a bit tight and there’s some areas of the economy where labour shortages, are still an issue. These are the sorts of things that are still in the board’s mind that these upside risks are there. They’re not centralised in the forecast. Because they’re very uncertain. But, those were the things the board was discussing today about why we might want to be looking at an increase in interest rates. In the end, we decided to wait for a bit more information. But it’s still front of mind.

One Nation’s first directly elected lower house MP, David Farley, will deliver his first speech later this afternoon.

We will bring you highlights of that tomorrow morning

They did not discuss an interest rate cut – just a raise and leaving the rate where it was.

Bullock opens with:

I know these increases have been tough for households with mortgages also facing high inflation, but they were necessary. The board judges that financial conditions are restrictive somewhat and is helping to slow the economy, needed to bring inflation down.

That said, inflation remains too high and the board remains concerned about the upside risk to the inflation outlook. The domestic economy continues to operate above capacity. And the labour market remains a little tight. (This means they think there are too many people employed)

Domestic spending and investment have remained resilient, and global activity has been supported by AI-related investment. The ongoing conflict in the Middle East has led to volatility in commodity prices. 

Oil is higher than prior to the conflict. Some firms have passed these cost pressures through to the prices of their goods and services. And others are looking to do so. Continuation of the conflict or further escalation could intensify inflationary pressures. The board is determined to ensure that expectations of higher inflation do not become embedded in price and wage setting decisions.

The board also remains concerned about the continued weakness in productivity growth. Productivity outcomes have been weak for some time. And continued weakness will constrain the economy’s ability to grow without generating high inflation. We expect that a period of subdued growth in the economy will be required to bring inflation down substantially. There’s signs financial conditions are constraining activity.

Conditions in the housing market have eased, though this only partly reflects monetary policy. We also assessed that labour market conditions remain tight, despite some easing in recent months. Our forecasts are for inflation to ease through next year, and be back around the midpoint of the target range by the end of 2027. 

The board therefore decided to leave the cash rate target under changed at this meeting, to allow more time to assess whether the economy is evolving as expected. However, the forecasts are uncertain, and there are upside risks to inflation. So, we’ll need – still need to see some further progress before the board can be confident we’re going to get inflation back to target with current monetary policy settings. 

The board will raise interest rates further if that is what is required to bring inflation down in a timely way. The board will be closely watching for evidence of upside risks to inflation materialising. Now, understand this is a difficult period for some households. High inflation hurts all Australians, especially the most vulnerable, and that’s why inflation, bringing inflation down is our priority.

Including supplementaries, there were six questions on Melon-Gate, six Dorothy Dixers, and just one question each on gambling, disability and gas exports. Perhaps this reflects skewed priorities, perhaps it reflects the importance of melon-related scandals.

Hopefully the Senate can finally get to the bottom of Melon-Gate with another six questions tomorrow.

Bit of an early end to the session for the first one back – so what did we learn?

We are picking right back off where we left off.

The Coalition are still on ‘toxic taxes’, Labor is still on ‘we don’t need to change so we won’t’ and the pair are working together to pass the major bills through the parliament, so you won’t actually get that many questions on policy.

Anara Watson

The AFR reported earlier today that two more KPMG executives are set to leave the firm in the wake of the KPMG whistleblowing scandal. General counsel Louise Capon and HR lead Dorothy Hisgrove have been under mounting pressure to resign for their alleged role in the covert searching of a whistleblower’s laptop.

But the broader allegations that KPMG partners misused confidential client information to win contracts matches past behaviour from the big four.

Josh Bornstein, The Australia Institute’s Director of Corporate Regulation, wrote about this issue recently:

The scandal that has swamped KPMG in the past month has many moving parts, but it can all be summarised in one earthy Australian expression – “same s–t, different bucket”.

The answer to the problem has been evident for a very long time. The rampant conflicts of interest in the sector can be addressed by banning the Big Four from operating both audit and consultancy businesses.

They should also be regulated like corporations and trade unions, with strong penalties that deter corrupt conduct.

Their whistleblowers should be protected and rewarded, not punished.

And if the government can use its procurement power to award contracts to companies with enterprise agreements, it can also terminate its contracts with service providers that have engaged in corruption. A three-month ban won’t cut it.

Both Capon and Hisgrove were questioned at the June hearing of an ongoing parliamentary inquiry, and are slated to appear at a subsequent hearing later this week.

At the same time the RBA made the announcement it was keeping interest rates steady it also released the August Statement on Monetary Policy. This is basically a 3 monthly update on how things are going and also it has new prediction for what is to come.

In May, the RBA forecast unemployment would reach 4.7%. At the time Michele Bulock (the RBA governor) was asked it that would be “too high”. She said no.

Well now the RBA see it getting to 4.8%. I wonder if she will think that is too high?…

That’s the basic question from Allegra Spender:

 Renters expect to pay a bond before they move in and often a cleaning fee when they leave, but that is not the case with oil and gas project. Last month another gas producer entered administration a making environmental clean-up if it happens the governments problem. The Government recognised the issue but not acted. When will the Government ensure companies have to put money aside to fully fund the clean-up of their projects?

Madeleine King:

 I thank the member for her question. I refer to that question. I think the member is referring to the voluntary administration at the Cliffhead Project through Triangle.

We are monitoring that situation and working with Core Cortex, the administrators that piloted that company. On 17 July, NOPSEMA found general direction 2118 and 1947 to be breached, and NOPSEMA is exercising its powers under the relevant Act to undertake actions where the breach directions to maintain critical safety and environmental outcomes where required.

What where want to be really clear about is the Cliffhead facility is currently safe. It is not a crewed production facility. The Australian government is engaging with NOPSEMA and other parties in relation to the ongoing regulation and management of safety and environmental risks.

There are no immediate risks in that regard. The offshore facilities are hydrocarbon-free. They stopped production just over two years ago. The wells have been shut in, secured, and they are remotely monitored. As to the cost of these things, I want to make it really clear again that taxpayers will not be left to foot the bill if companies do not do the right thing in respect of this particular project – but also – sorry, I can’t see the member to address her question at the moment, ’cause the Leader of The Nationals in the House of Representatives is in the way.

What I want to make clear is insolvency does not excuse titleholders from decommissioning responsibilities, and the government is considering all enforcement options to hold responsible titleholders and related parties, more importantly – or very importantly – accountable. The Australian taxpayer will not bear any financial responsibility for decommissioning offshore oil and gas projects where titleholders have failed to provision and plan for these activities, as they are required to do so by law.

Before we came into government, the Labor Party, in opposition, agreed with the government of the time to implement legislation to make sure that there was a trailing liability for offshore oil and gas, ’cause that is the jurisdiction that the Commonwealth has in this regard, and that is happening and it’s been implemented now.

The government will continue to pursue all available mechanisms under the law to hold responsible titleholders accountable for those offshore oil and gas projects.

We will make sure they are safe for any people that are associated with them. Worker safety is of vital importance. Really importantly, the environmental side of this is very, very important. But this particular project is safe and, really importantly, the taxpayer will not foot the bill, and the industry as a whole will bear the burden of the projects that they have left.

After that brief moment of bipartisanship, Kevin Hogan then asks:

Rents have reportedly increased by 10% since the budget just three months ago, Prime Minister, which of the following are to blame? A. Record high immigration outpacing new home builds. B. Labor’s toxic taxes on housing. C. The 15 interest rate rises under Labor. Or D. All of the above

Few things here:

Negative gearing is grandfathered. So what are they talking about? The changes aren’t coming in until March 2027. So again, what are they talking about? Migration is not to blame for the housing affordability crisis, but also, it has been coming down and while the Coalition may think it is clever to join One Nation in trying to use the wrong stats (like total arrivals, instead of net migration) it is having a pretty detrimental impact on migrants and society at large. How are interest rate rises, from the past four years, responsible for what happened in the last few months?

WHY IS OUR POLITICAL DEBATE THIS DIABOLICALLY DUMB?

Chamers:

A couple of important points to make, whether it is house prices, auction clearance rates, rent or other indicators in the housing market with lending data later in the week as well. It’s important to remember as the Reserve Bank pointed out today and others have pointed out in their contributions that there are a number of factors playing out in the housing market, whether it be interest rate movements earlier in the year, whether it be extreme global economic uncertainty. There are a number of factors playing out in the housing market and that is why we saw some softening in the housing market before the budget that we handed down in May.

That’s the first point. The second point is when it comes to the changes we made in the budget around housing for the reasons the Prime Minister ran through to make sure we can give first-time buyers a fair crack in the housing market which is locked about for too long.

It’s really important to remember the Treasury assumptions in the budget about the impact on the housing market assumptions over the next couple of years and not just over the first couple of months. We have had for some time now I put on rent, we have had for some time now — upward pressure. We have had not enough homes in our community.

We are taking the necessary steps to build more homes, because we know that is the best way over time to put downward pressure on rent. When it comes to migration, I understand that those opposite want to go about this in the most divisive way that they can. But they need to recognise that overseas migration has come down 45% since its peak. When we came to office it was absolutely rocketing and we have taken steps to moderate that overseas migration number at the same time as we are investing almost $50 billion in the main issue in housing which is housing supply. Whether it is approvals, investment numbers, the commencement numbers.

They were going backwards when we came to office, we have been turning that around and it will take time to see better housing market that we want to see, whether it is on rent, the impact on house prices over the medium term, the share of the market. There is a lot of volatility there, a lot of that existed before the budget and we measure the impact of our policies over a period of the next few years and not just the first few months.

Skye Predavec

Instead of letting hurdles like the Australian Constitution get in the way, Pauline Hanson is continuing her effort from earlier today, questioning the Labor government on “ISIS Brides” and her party’s bill seeking to ban certain Australian citizens from returning home. The bill was also the subject of a failed attempt to move suspend standing orders earlier today, when the Greens’ David Shoebridge commented “It’s got about as much chance of surviving a constitutional challenge as a paper kite in a bushfire.”

Labor’s Murray Watt, representing the Home Affairs Minister, has a clear answer: “I can only assume that you’re referring to the bill that you are seeking to introduce around temporary exclusion orders, and I remind you, as I said earlier today, that that bill is almost certain to be found unconstitutional by the High Court if it were passed by this parliament.”

Julie Collins takes a dixer to say:

I know so many people in this place have engaged because they are concerned about the impact this will have on our country and I want to assure all members are taking this very seriously indeed and we are acting. In terms of an update there are 236 confirmed or suspected positive detections of the H5 bird flu in Australia, 10 in Western Australia, 163 in South Australia, for in New South Wales, one in Queensland and 58 in Victoria.

Our technical experts are working around the clock to confirm detections and I’ve seen firsthand the CSIRO Australian centre Portuguese preparedness in Geelong in the past few weeks just how much there have been working around the clock. Is set for sometime the arrival of the H5 bird flu in Australia is not and we couldn’t stop the migratory bird. Of also said clearly that Australian should expect to see South Lismore spread and larger numbers of wildlife being affected. We have been really upfront that they will be more large mass mortalities of native birds in Australia.

We have seen the impact bird flu has had the overseas which is why we have been planning. With invested over 130 million dollars to strengthen our preparedness and responsiveness and that includes a spot about $2 billion of additional security funding.

It has $25 million that also deliver with the states and territories in terms of the current on ground response for player security resourcing.

While we cannot stop the virus spreading across wild birds we can take action to protect most at risk species and I’m pleased to advise the house that vaccination is now part of response. Earlier today alongside the Minister for the Environment and the Australia’s chief veterinary officer I announced the first bird flu vaccine is expected to roll out in the coming days on priority native bird species.

This is based on an agreed national approach and will be guided by expert scientific advice. Is a targeted approach that will mean states and territories are able to commence vaccination activities initially focusing on priority species identified by the states and territories.

This obviously builds on the work that we’re doing with the states and territories and with industry to help manage the response to the H5 bird flu. I want to reiterate that at this time has been no detections in a poultry or broader agricultural system and that the risk to human health remains low. I also again want to thank the Australian public for the huge role they played and to remind them that if you see sick or dead birds or other animals do not touch them, please avoid them, contact the bird flu .gov .au where you can record them and get the most up-to-date information in relation to Australia’s bird flu.

Darren Chester also adds his support to this.

The Greens MP for Ryan, Elizabeth Watson-Brown asks:

At the recent Labor National Conference, ordinary Labor members and Labor MPs pushed to hold a vote in support of a 25% tax on gas exports.

Given that around 70% of Australians are now your own members support a gas tax, will you listen to everyday Australians instead of the gas lobby, and implement a minimum 25% tax on gas exports.

Not all the question is in order, so Albanese answers the bits he pleases:

I thank the member for Ryan for her question, but I am somewhat surprised at getting a question from a member of a political party who not only have secret conferences, had a leadership ballot in this building a few years ago, where we only found out that there was an attempted coup many months later, what we do, in stark contrast, is have a conference that is broadcast live on national TV for all to see.

We have the election of 400 delegates and 400 proxy delegates who represent workers, who represent local branch members, who represent regions right around Australia, including, for example, in my great state of New South Wales, there are rank and file votes in every single electorate to elect a representative to go to, in this case, to Adelaide over the break in July, and it was an extremely successful conference because one of the things that shone through about that conference is that we in the Australian Labor Party are united about our views. We in the Australian Labor Party know what we stand for, and that was reflected in the platform that was in the platform that was adopted at the conference.

Any delegate can come along, move whatever amendments that they like, and put it to the conference. And I must say that there were a range of highlights to the conference. But we’re united about wanting a strong economy that works for people. We’re united about wanting to make sure that no one gets left behind.

We’re united about making sure that we deal with not just the challenge of climate change, but that we seize the opportunities of climate change action. We’re united by making sure that we want every Australian to fulfill the opportunity that they have to have the best life possible through an education, whether it be early education, whether it be the proper schools funding, where we’ve delivered the Gonski reforms first spoken about in 2012, whether it be free take the universities accord, all of these measures matting, or whether it be our place in the world, our engagement in our region, our engagement in the Pacific, our engagement through peace and security-that is a foundation stone. Our support for Orcas, which was a foundation stone as well of jobs. We know what we stand for. Everyone gets to see it in full public view. view, and that’s because we’re proud of who we are.

Tanya Plibersek takes a dixer on parental leave, mostly so she can remind people that the right of Australia is pretty against it:

We know, of course, the Shadow Treasurer has managed to not be here again when we talk about the paid parental leave. We know what he said about it, but you know the Liberals have never liked it. Mums were rawters and double dippers, and and One Nation as well. Senator Hansen has said that in 2017 she claimed that women get themselves pregnant for the money. She said this year, ‘listen, love, you have the equipment. That’s what you’re here for. If you don’t want to interrupt your career, don’t have a baby’.

At the press club, she said the gender pay gap is all smoke and mirrors. ‘Women take time off, and they’re not paid their wages because they’re not working well. Fair enough’.

We say it’s not fair enough. That families need help. That is the time in life where they need the most help, where they’ve got new little babies, and we are proud of the fact that we have more than doubled that help.

Ok so the RBA has kept rates on hold at 4.35%

It’s always worth checking to see what has changed between now and the last time they made a decision to get a sense of where things might be going.

To be honest there was not a lot different.

In June the RBA statement said this

Following the three increases in the cash rate target since the beginning of the year, financial conditions are now tighter than they were, and there are signs that the economy is slowing as expected. But inflation is still too high and the Board judged that it was appropriate to leave the cash rate target unchanged while it assesses the response to previous interest rate rises and the impact of the oil supply disruption.

Today they have changed it to

Following three increases in the cash rate target since the beginning of the year, financial conditions are now tighter than they were, and the economy appears to be slowing as expected. But inflation is still too high. It is not expected to return to around the midpoint of the target range until late 2027 and there are upside risks to this projection. With monetary policy judged to be somewhat restrictive, the Board decided to leave the cash rate target unchanged while it assesses how the economy is evolving.

So we have mostly gone from signs that the economy is slowing to is appears to be slowing.

It still thinks there are some risks to inflation will go up (it always does), but this does suggest no more rate rises this year unless something unexpected happens.

Which means that Angus Taylor is back:

My question is to the prime minister: Labor’s toxic taxes and 15 interest rate rises on his watch have completely tanked the housing market. Can the prime minister confirm the average new mortgage holder is paying $29,000 a year more in interest alone.

Anthony Albanese decides to take this one and manages to annoy Berries and Cream boy so much, he gets booted from the chamber:

What I can confirm is that we do understand that Australians are doing it tough, and that there are cost of living pressures on them. But that’s why every day we look at doing something about it-not just identifying grievance, but producing solutions, not protesting, arguing for progress as we go forward as well.

And that’s why every day we look to deliver real change, to make a positive difference, whether it be higher wages in aged care, childcare, five wage increases for the lowest paid workers, now more than $12,000 a year better off since 2022, number of times that a coalition government or opposition, for that matter, has ever put forward a submission of the Fair Work Commission arguing for wages to be maintained in real terms zero, never, never ever. Just like income tax cuts, we know at the last election we went to them arguing for income tax cuts.

They said they’d reverse them. They not only voted against income tax cuts in this chamber. They said they would vote and reverse them. Now, as a result of the measures that we put in place, every Australian worker got an income tax cut on July 1. Every Australian is benefiting from stronger Medicare as well. Something that they don’t even know what it is.

There is a point of order about relevance and Milton Dick tells the PM to get back to the main point.

Albanese:

Well, I was asked about interest rates and the impact that it has and what views would be well.
Someone in this place said on the 10th of November 2020, nobody wins from low interest rates.
On the 23rd of October 2019, they said at the beginning of this term, I deliberately communicated my concern about the Reserve Bank continuing to cut interest rates.

Going back, in case you think that was an accident, in 2018, we need to create the policy settings to progressively increase interest rates. Money is too cheap, and it’s time we did something about it around the policy framework. The question for this leader of the opposition: Why did he make this man the shadow treasurer? Why did he make him the shadow treasurer?
Who argued? Who argued that interest rates were too low?

The answer is Tim Wilson and he gets so upset at having his words returned to him, he is booted from the chamber for interjections (Having been previously warned).

Does anyone lose from this action? No.

Chalmers uses a dixer to address the chamber on the RBA board decision:

I can inform the House that today the Reserve Bank’s monetary policy board has held interest rates steady at 4.35% This will come as a relief to Australians with a mortgage.

It is a welcome decision at a time of heightened uncertainty in the world and persistent pressures in our own economy at home as well. Now, this is the second rates decision since the budget, and on both occasions we’ve seen rates held steady. And this decision reflects the fact that inflation has been coming in well under the Reserve Bank and Treasury forecasts, mr. Speaker. In the Reserve Bank statement on monetary policy reliefs today, they have downgraded forecasts for underlying inflation and they have upgraded forecasts for growth.

In June, Mr. Speaker, inflation fell again. That means that inflation has now moderated for three months in a row, but it is still higher than we’d like.

There still is a lot of uncertainty going forward, and we know that people are still under pressure. Now, that recent inflation data has been better than expected, but the war in the Middle East is putting upward pressure on prices, and it’s weighing on growth around the world, and in our own economy as well. Now we did already have inflation challenge in our economy, but the conflict is making that harder.

And that’s why, from an economic point of view, a proper, enduring end to this war cannot come soon enough. We desperately need to see an end to this war in the Middle East. (One would also think the human point of view would also be very important)

Now inflation has gone up since March in most major advanced economies, but it’s come down here in Australia.

When we came to office, inflation was north of 6% and rapidly rising. It’s now much lower than that. Similarly, when it comes to underlying inflation, now the government’s responsible economic management has meant the budget’s much stronger and debt is much lower than what we inherited.

That’s why just last week, S&P Global, the ratings agency, reaffirmed Australia’s AAA credit rating, and that means that we are one of only nine countries in the world with a triple A sovereign credit rating from all three major ratings agencies, and we’ve also got lower gross debt than every major advanced economy, Mr. Speaker. Now we know that people are still under pressure despite this welcome decision from the Independent Reserve Bank today. It is a welcome decision. It does come at a time of heightened global economic uncertainty.

The government, for its part, will continue to manage the budget responsibly. Will continue to help people with the cost of living in an ongoing and responsible way, Mr. Speaker.

And I hear those opposite interjecting throughout the course of this answer. They were desperately hoping for an interest rate rise today, and they are desperately disappointed that they didn’t get one. That’s the difference between this side and that side. We’re for cost of living relief, therefore higher interest rates.

Skye Predavec

As Labor and the Coalition “inch towards a deal” on gambling which would fall far short of the recommendations of the 2023 Murphy review, Greens leader Larissa Waters is pressing Labor on their willingness to work with the Liberals in the Senate on gambling and disability.

Waters’ question:

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Wong. Last week we heard damning evidence about the predatory behaviour of gambling corporations, grooming people with a gambling addiction to keep betting, and letting streaming services continue to advertise with no limits.

Yet today we’re hearing media reports of a deal between Labour and the Liberals to pass weak gambling reforms that do not fully deal with the recommendations in the Murphy report. How can you sleep at night doing a deal with the Liberals to pass gambling reforms that protect gambling corporations’ profits, rather than delivering evidence-based policy that protects people?

Senator Wong’s response:

The focus of the reforms that the government has brought forward is the protection of Australians. I think that is something we all wish to do. I appreciate you don’t agree with some of the current policy and you certainly don’t agree with us talking to the coalition in order to pass legislation. We have to deal with this chamber, as you know, Senator, with either the coalition or yourselves in order to get legislation passed.

… Ultimately, the government needs to engage with either of those two groups in the chamber in order to pass the parliament. We’ve said that we are open to sensible amendments to deliver real change, and that’s what the government’s engaging in.

Senator Waters’ supplementary question, “How can you sleep at night when you’re ganging up with the Liberals to cut essential support to 200 and forty-one 1000 people?”, received a similar response.

Angus Taylor asks:

Can the Prime Minister tell Australians why his government is targeting women going through divorce or the death of a partner to raise revenue through his heartless widows tax?

Jim Chalmers takes this:

Thank you for and to the leader of the opposition for his question. The issue he raises, which was the subject of a stunt from those opposite earlier today.
Well, the reason the reason I take the interjections, Mr. Speaker, the reason it’s a stunt what they did earlier in the Parliament, Mr. Speaker, is because they said there wasn’t enough consultation, and now they’re saying there’s too much consultation, and that exposes the absurdity of the stunt that they tried to put on earlier on in the Parliament today, Mr. Speaker.

Is it any wonder that they’re doing worse under this leader of the opposition than they were doing under Susan Ley?

Is that if that’s the best that they can do, Mr. Speaker? They said there wasn’t enough consultation. Now they say there is too much consultation.

Now the government has been very clear that we will address this issue in the legislation, which is currently out for consultation, Mr. Speaker. It wasn’t that long ago they were saying consultation was important. Now they’re saying consultation is not important, Mr. Speaker.

The draft legislation that we have released will ensure a property will keep access to negative gearing if it was owned on budget night, or treated as a new build if the property was acquired from a spouse through an inheritance or a relationship breakdown, or where someone inherits an asset in which they had an ownership share, we’ve been very clear about that, and that’s what the draft legislation, which is out for consultation right now, is all about, Mr. Speaker.

The final point is this: it’s not unusual for tax reform of this magnitude to be legislated in stages, and that’s what the government is doing. These changes don’t come into being until the 1st of July next year, and we are working in a considered and a methodical way through subsequent pieces of legislation to get the implementation details right. That requires consultation, something that those opposite used to call for.

Statement by the Monetary Policy Board: Monetary Policy Decision

At its meeting today, the Board decided to leave the cash rate target unchanged at 4.35 per cent.

Inflation picked up materially in the second half of 2025, and information since the beginning of this year confirms that some of the increase reflected greater capacity pressures. While the impact of the Middle East conflict on inflation has so far been less than expected, headline inflation is still too high. Trimmed mean inflation also remains elevated and is little changed from the March quarter. Oil and most related commodity prices remain higher than they were prior to the Middle East conflict. Some firms experiencing cost pressures are increasing the prices of their goods and services and others are looking to do so. Short-term measures of inflation expectations have eased but remain higher than earlier in the year.

Financial conditions have tightened in response to three increases in the cash rate target this year. Money market interest rates and government bond yields have risen, and the exchange rate has appreciated. There are signs that consumer spending growth is slowing gradually as expected, while growth in business debt and investment is strong. Momentum in the housing market has shifted, with housing prices falling in some capital cities and new housing loans declining noticeably. Labour market conditions have eased by a little more than expected in recent months. Labour market leading indicators point to only limited easing in the near term.

There continue to be heightened uncertainties about the outlook for domestic economic activity and inflation. Resolution of the Middle East conflict remains uncertain, and there are scenarios where inflation is higher and activity lower than forecast. Global oil supply will take time to recover, maintaining upward pressure on global energy prices and inflation, in which case domestic inflationary pressures could be higher than expected. A period of prolonged uncertainty may also cause growth to be lower overseas and in Australia. So far, growth in Australia’s major trading partners has been stronger than expected, as the boost from AI-related investment has outweighed the adverse effects of the Middle East conflict. In Australia, historically weak productivity growth continues to constrain potential growth.

Decision

The disruption to global oil supply is adding directly to inflation and there are indications that higher fuel prices are being passed through to prices of other goods and services, so inflation is likely to remain high for some time. This inflation impulse is in addition to the effect of capacity pressures in the economy.

The Board remains focused on ensuring that high inflation does not become embedded. To achieve this, growth in aggregate demand needs to remain subdued to reduce capacity pressures and bring inflation back to target. Following three increases in the cash rate target since the beginning of the year, financial conditions are now tighter than they were, and the economy appears to be slowing as expected. But inflation is still too high. It is not expected to return to around the midpoint of the target range until late 2027 and there are upside risks to this projection. With monetary policy judged to be somewhat restrictive, the Board decided to leave the cash rate target unchanged while it assesses how the economy is evolving. The Board will continue to do what it considers necessary to bring inflation sustainably back to target, including increasing the cash rate target further if upside risks materialise.

Accordingly, the Board will be attentive to the data and the evolving assessment of the outlook and risks to guide its decisions. Monetary policy is well placed to respond to developments and the Board is focused on its mandate to deliver price stability and full employment.

Today’s policy decision was unanimous.

Date11 August 2026

As expected, the RBA has not moved the interest rate and it remains at 4.35%

Zali Steggall brings back one of the biggest issues in Australia, which we don’t have policy answers for, as yet:

Amidst the 51% rise in home insurance premiums in five years, and one in five Australians uninsured or underinsured. The resilience building council rating scheme helped thousands of households reduce disaster risk and lower their insurance cost, let the government’s allowed the scheme’s funding to lapse on June 30. I have written to the government asking for it to be restored, but received no response. Is the Government’s position that households are on their own in dealing with escalating climate risk and rising insurance costs?

Daniel Mulino says:

I thank the honourable member for her question and she has a long standing interest in these issues. The Albanese government is committed to making insurance more affordable and accessible for Australian households and businesses. That involves a range of different approaches.

One is this government is investing in the disaster ready fund, which, through the minister for emergency services, that fund is seeing the rollout of mitigation works right across the country. And that’s something which is being informed by data from the insurance sector, the hazards insurance partnership, which is world leading.

When I travel to other countries or talk to insurance regulators in the other countries, they see what they’re doing in Australia as world leading on that front.

What we’re also doing is strengthening the insurance, the general insurance code of practice. That code of practice is being finalised at the minute. For the first time, that code of practice will be approved by ASIC and will be contractually enforceable.

We’re currently engaged with both consumer groups but also the insurance industry to make sure there are a range of protections in that code of practice for consumers. In the last budget, we announced a measure that is really important to ensure that we will work towards greater price transparency in insurance.

I have now going to lead that project and work with consumer groups and the industry and experts to make sure that we can work towards an insurance industry where there’s regulation to ensure there’s much more transparency when it comes to the premiums that are charged, when it comes to change in premiums and much more transparency when there’s a reduction in risk, that’s reflected in the price.

That price transparency project is extremely important. And we have already begun discussions with consumer groups and with industry on that. This government has adopted an extremely strategic approach to these issues, because they haven’t arisen overnight, they’ve been getting worse and worse for decades. And climate change is making this worse and worse, as you know, but as those opposite do not accept. That’s one of the fundamental problems with their approach to insurance.

We’re working very constructively with consumer groups, academics, experts and the insure sector to make sure we strengthen the regulation of insurance.

Sorry Angus, the housing crash ain’t a crash to worry about.

Angus Taylor is all set to continue with the scare that house prices are about to “crash”.

He suggested in his question that “ANZ bank today reports that Sydney house prices could fall by almost 15%, the worst crash in more than four decades.”

Well ok, let’s suggest Sydney house prices do go down by 14.5% (he chose Sydney, because ANZ for example suggests prices in Perth for eg will only fall by a touch over 5%)

If that fall were to happen it would take the median Sydney house price back to $1.333m – or where they were in June 2023 and still 40% higher than they were in June 2020!

That post from Sky is great timing, because now we have the question in the house.

Mary Aldred asks:

On the Deep Bush podcast, filmed at the Lodge, the Prime Minister made a series of foul mouthed classless comments about women. Will the Prime Minister personally apologise to the Prime Minister of Japan, Her Excellency Sanae Takaichi, for his disrespectful behaviour?

Albanese is not apologising. Which means one – they don’t think it is permeating into the electorate, and don’t want to give grist to the ‘Albanese is not popular with women’ push and two – they have some sort of assurance that Japan won’t be escalating this (it was the former ambassador to Japan who wrote for the Australian a couple of days ago, not the current).

It does have to be said that if this were Scott Morrison, combined with the ‘difficult’ comment and also just the shag, marry, date answer, people would be losing their minds. Albanese has the advantage that he is not seen as being as dismissive of women as Morrison, but there is a pattern here he should be paying attention to.

Albanese:

I reject the assertion in the question. Australia and Japan have never been closer or more strategically aligned. And my government has taken our special strategic partnership to new heights. During the recent visit by Prime Minister Takaichi, we announced substantial outcomes, including a joint declaration on economic security co-operation, signalling our resolve to support each other in the face of economic coercion, including to consult each other on economic security contingencies.

We released statements on enhanced defence and security co-operation, on energy security, on critical minerals co-operation and a new strategic cyber-partnership. Prime Minister Takaichi is a friend of Australia and a friend of mine. Together we’re focused on working together to shape a free and open Indo-Pacific that’s peaceful, stable, and prosperous, as demonstrated by the outcomes in the agreement.

Skye Predavec

To start off question time in the Senate, Liberal Senator Dave Sharma is asking about the most pressing issue for Australians, Anthony Albanese’s appearance on the Bush Deep podcast in early July. The podcast appearance was controversial at the time for Albanese playing along with a game of “shag, marry, kill”, but has recently provoked more controversy over a joke the PM made about a gift of melons from his Japanese counterpart.

Senator Sharma’s question:

My question is to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Senator Wong. Minister, have you advised the Prime Minister to apologise to the Japanese Prime Minister for the crude and insulting comments and gestures he made when discussing a symbolic and thoughtful gift of Crown Melons he received from her.

And the response from Senator Wong:

Thank you, President. First, I would say to those opposite that Prime Minister Takeichi is a friend of Australia’s and a friend of the Prime Minister’s and the relationship with Japan is closer than it has ever been. I am disappointed that those opposite are so desperate to score political points that they seek to confect a diplomatic issue.

The relationship with Japan has bipartisan support, as it should be. It is a very important relationship for Australia and I would emphasise how grateful I am to have the close relationship that I have with Foreign Minister Motegi, who I spoke to just over a fortnight ago on the sidelines of the ASEAN Foreign Ministers’ meeting.

Those opposite would know that I have, or may know, I have visited Japan, I think, 7 times as Foreign Minister. This goes to the relationship between Japan and Australia … Australia’s relationship with Japan is one of the most important relationships we have. In fact, I often describe it publicly as our special strategic partnership is second only to our alliances, particularly our alliance with the United States. It’s a relationship that has been strengthened under this government, and we will continue to do that because it is in Australia’s national interest.

We see the chamber stand as a mark of respect for Hinch, and then it is into the questions.

And despite five weeks to come up with a strategy, the Coalition is going with….”toxic taxes”.

Angus Taylor:

Labor’s toxic taxes have tanked the housing market. ANZ bank today reports that Sydney house prices could fall by almost 15%, the worst crash in more than four decades. Will the Prime Minister finally admit Labor’s broken promises on capital gains tax and negative gearing have made millions of Australian homeowners worse off?

Anthony Albanese:

I’m asked about housing issues. In the budget, it is true that we had measures that were aimed at addressing the challenges that are facing young Australians when it comes to owning a house. I note that Scott Pape, the Barefoot Investor, someone well known, not always part of a cheer squad for the government, wrote in the Herald Sun – “average house prices have increased by more than 400% since 2000, partly on the back of taxpayer-funded landlord welfare. They have grown much faster than workers’ wages. Which is why we’re in this pickle. Somewhere along the way we started treating houses like a share price. Something to check, brag about, and borrow against. We forget what they’re for, a house is for living in”.

What he went on to say, was that the people who are concerned aren’t the young people, finally getting a foot in the door. What we have…what we have had is creating a change in the way the tax system operates, in order to give first home buyers a fair crack. So that, so that – when last Saturday, people were going along to an auction, for an existing home, they were not competing against investors seeking to negatively gear the property, but they were competing against other people who wanted a roof over their head. A roof over their head.

I don’t want to be a prime minister who leads the country that sees growing inequality, that sees the opportunity for people to get into their first home, as being defined on whether mum or dad can help them. 

I want people to have the opportunity to be the first in their family to own their own home, that is something which is part of the great Australian dream, and the truth is, that the great Australian dream was becoming a nightmare. Because if people can’t get that access, that access to home ownership, then it changes everything else in their lives.

It changes the opportunities for their kids to get a good education. It changes their health outcomes, it changes where they can engage as a member of society. So, what we are doing here is making a change, a change that has been called for in the past by people, including – including the Shadow Treasurer, a change that has been called for, by his predecessor, the former shadow Treasurer, the former member for North Sydney, who in his valedictory speech, waited until he was leaving the joint, before he said the system is broken and we should fix it. Well, we’re fixing it.

You’ll notice there that Albanese still can’t say the policy is working as designed – and slowing the insane growth of house prices – because he can’t (he feels). To do so would give all the critics of this policy weeks and weeks of scare campaigns. That is where we are at.

But it’s not time for questions just yet.

First we have to welcome the Australian/Vietnam relationship and the agreements just signed.

Then we have the condolence motion for Derryn Hinch.

At 2.30, the RBA will hand down its decision on whether or not to raise interest rates (the over riding consensus is that the board won’t move.

Skye Predavec

Victorian Independent Senator Lidia Thorpe has used her two-minute statement to condemn the state government’s Corrections Amendment Bill 2026 , also known as the “No Air in Prison Bill”. The Human Rights Law Centre has condemned the bill for violating Victoria’s Charter of Human Rights, saying it “seeks to strip away one of the few minimum protections for people in prison – the right to have at least one hour each day in the open air”.

Read Thorpe’s full speech below:

Breathing fresh air and seeing the sky is a basic human right, enshrined in international law and in the Victorian Charter of Human Rights. Just last month, the Victorian Government introduced their No Air in Prison Bill, which strips people of this right. This bill legalises inhumane treatment in contravention of Victoria’s own human rights charter.

It means people in prison won’t have guaranteed access to go outside for fresh air, and the government cannot be held accountable for this cruel treatment. Proud Wiradjuri woman Kelly Flanagan, who has spent time in Dame Phyllis Frost’s women’s prison, has said, “being locked in a 2 by 3 metre cement cell with no hope of coming out, despair, psychological distress and hopelessness will wreak havoc on women’s mental state. It will create unsafe conditions for officers as well as women.”

Days ago, an 18-year-old woman died in the Dane Phyllis Frost Centre after repeated lockdowns. My heart goes out to her family. Instead of ensuring this doesn’t happen again, the Victorian government is passing laws that will make conditions worse and disproportionately harm First Peoples.

People in prisons are our brothers, sisters, parents and children. The trauma they experience in prison follows them home and impacts families and communities. That’s why we need a federal Human Rights Act in this country and to set minimum standards for these prisons who are torturing children, women and people. The federal government has the power to act do so.

Here is some of how Mike Bowers has seen the day

We are just outside QT – the first of the new parliament and then, about halfway through that, there will be the RBA decision.

There will also be a condolence motion for Victorian senator and broadcaster Derryn Hinch ahead of the questions.

Skye Predavec

After spending its first hour on stunt motions around capital gains tax changes and terrorism, the Senate is now back to its scheduled business: debating the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 1) Bill 2026.

As the “omnibus” name implies, there’s a lot going on here.

Civil liberties organisations including National Legal Aid and the NSW Council for Civil Liberties have expressed concern over several aspects of the bill, including the extension of warrant and intelligence gathering powers for the AFP and ACIC and the introduction of evidentiary certificates for serious drug offences.

But some of the most potentially consequential changes in Omnibus No. 1 concern the measurement of illicit drugs.

Currently, quantity is measured based on the amount of the illicit drug itself. If a block of powder, for example, is 2kg with 1kg of that being cocaine, it counts as being 1kg of cocaine.

This bill would change measurements to be of an entire mixture, even if it mostly does not contain the drug. That same 2kg block of powder, despite containing only 1kg of cocaine, would now count as 2kg for the purposes of the law.

This matters because Commonwealth drug offences come in tiers based on the quantity of drug found, so this could automatically see sentences significantly increased. If someone traffics that 2kg, 50% cocaine block of powder, it currently counts as a “marketable quantity”, with a penalty of 25 years imprisonment. This bill would move that up to “commercial quantity”, with a penalty of life imprisonment.

Civil liberties organisations have expressed concern that the shift from pure-weight to mixed-weight measurements of illicit drugs “will disproportionately affect lower-level participants in drug supply chains, including mules, runners and others at the bottom of criminal enterprises, who are more likely to handle substances of lower purity and who make up the majority of legal aid clients in Commonwealth drug matters.”

The Greens have moved an amendment to oppose changes to serious drug offences in this bill, including those concerning measurement.

Hanson wants to debate an urgency motion in the senate on one of her numerous attempts to scare monger (that is what her motions are usually about)

This time about ‘terror organisations’.

It won’t get through but it is managing to dominate the senate at the moment, so guess you can say she counts that as a win.

Skye Predavec

Senator Michaelia Cash is looking to move a motion on “the Albanese Labour Government’s toxic taxes”

Specifically, Cash is seeking to suspend standing orders to discuss to condemn the Government over what the Opposition has labelled the “widow tax”, an unintended consequence of the tax overhaul earlier this year which means widowers and divorcees could face less favourable tax treatment on investment properties they previously shared with a partner.

The Government released draft legislation to address the problem last week, which is open for consultation until 21 August.

Labor and the Greens have said they will not be supporting the suspension of standing orders.

The flights were announced ahead of the meeting, but here is the rest of it (see below)

Why is this important? Because despite Australia’s public facing policy, it is worried about America. And that includes America post Trump (whenever that will be) and there has been a lot of work being done to build up relationships with other middle powers, away from super powers and whatever happens there. Canada, Japan, South Korea, India, Vietnam, the UK, France, Spain, Germany – all of it is happening behind closed doors. This is another part of the public facing release.

Australia and Vietnam have agreed to strengthen cooperation across education, trade and innovation, to enhance the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership between the two countries.
 
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam and President of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, His Excellency Mr To Lam issued a Joint Statement on Deepening the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership between Australia and Vietnam on priorities including economic engagement, climate, energy and science.
 
The two leaders also issued a Joint Statement on Economic Resilience Cooperation and a Joint Statement on Science, Research and Innovation.
 
The agreements announced today will strengthen economic ties and create new opportunities for businesses in both countries.
 
Trade Ministers signed an agreement to deepen cooperation in the digital economy, including supporting cross-border trade to promote e-commerce and create opportunities for Australian businesses in digital health and banking services.
The visit also saw Vietjet announce yesterday direct flights between Ho Chi Minh City and Western Sydney International Airport.
 
Flights will begin in January 2027, operating twice a week before increasing to three services a week from March.
 
Australia and Vietnam also agreed to continue to strengthen existing cooperation on agriculture and sustainable development, including biosecurity, food safety and aquaculture.
 
Australia secured agreement for the recommencement of market access for Australian game meat, including kangaroo meat.
 
Both countries are working toward closer health cooperation, which will see Australia supporting medical research, pandemic preparedness, and rural and remote healthcare in Vietnam.
 
Education remains one of the strongest links between Australia and Vietnam.
 
A new Memorandum of Understanding on vocational education and training will support Australian providers to deliver industry-focused training in Vietnam.
 
Australia also welcomed Vietnam’s approval of an investment licence for RMIT University, allowing it to establish a new campus in Hanoi.

The day following Victorian business lobbies announcing a campaign to stop the work from home legislation going through the Victorian parliament….the new Labor leader and premier has announced a delay to the work from home legislation.

We said yesterday this would become a thing and it has.

Much like migration, which is all about appeasing the right and thinking that it might make the debate less hot, this is about appeasing business interests who will continue to complain about any rights workers get.

So anyway, the business lobbies are very happy with the delay.

The PM is holding his press conference with To Lam discussing the agreements Australia has just signed with Vietnam.

From there, parliament will start. The NDIS deal is all but done and the gambling one looks pretty tied up too.

Sigh.

Rod Campbell

Online gambling giant bet365 has never paid company tax in Australia and claims to have never made a profit here, as I wrote earlier.

This could have something to do with the fact that the list of addresses of bet365 addresses reads like a bingo card of the world’s most notorious tax havens. Check it out:

• Malta
• Gibraltar
• Channel Islands
• Curacao
• Delaware
• BINGO!!!!

Anara Watson

The AUKUS Public Inquiry is in Newcastle today, and The Australia Institute’s co-CEO Leanne Minshull is there in her role as Commissioner.

Representatives from Independent and Peaceful Australia Network, Hunter Peace Group, Climate Action Newcastle and Christians for Peace Newcastle have already presented their submissions to the Inquiry, but those submissions are available online if you’d like to read them.

And if you’re interested, you can watch the livestream here: AUKUS Public Inquiry: Newcastle Livestream

There are a lot of agreements which have been signed, but here is the main one (presented in full because they so rarely are)

JOINT STATEMENT ON DEEPENING THE COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN VIET NAM AND AUSTRALIA

1. On the occasion of his visit to Australia, His Excellency To Lam, General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Viet Nam and State President of Viet Nam, met the Honourable Anthony Albanese MP, the Prime Minister of Australia in Canberra, on the traditional land of the Ngunnawal peoples.
2. Leaders reaffirmed the strength of the Viet Nam-Australia Comprehensive Strategic Partnership (CSP) built on mutual strategic trust and understanding over more than 50 years. They welcomed the substantial progress in deepening the CSP, reflecting the increasing convergence of strategic interests and agreed that cooperation should be ambitious and forward-looking.

Deepening Political, Defence, Security and Justice Cooperation

1. Leaders reaffirmed their commitment to further strengthen political trust and mutual understanding through promoting frequent high-level exchanges and contacts, maintaining and effectively utilising existing dialogue and consultation mechanisms, and promoting exchanges among relevant agencies, parliaments, localities, businesses and people of the two countries.
2. Leaders acknowledged the two countries’ close defence and security ties, which contribute to peace, stability and development of the region. Leaders welcomed the updated Joint Vision Statement on Further Defence Cooperation. They reiterated their commitment to further strengthen defence and security engagement, including through dialogue and consultations, personnel training, inter-service cooperation, information sharing, military medicine, peacekeeping cooperation, maritime security, search and rescue and counter-terrorism. They agreed to continue multinational operational exchanges building on Viet Nam’s participation in Exercise KAKADU in 2024 and 2026, and observation of Exercise TALISMAN SABRE in 2025.
3. Leaders highlighted bilateral maritime cooperation under Australia Southeast Asia Maritime Partnerships to address shared maritime challenges in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Leaders welcomed progress of an Australia-Viet Nam Maritime Law Enforcement Agreement and a Cooperation and Mutual Assistance Agreement to enhance operational capability between agencies and contribute to regional security.
4. Leaders agreed to step up cooperation in countering transnational organised crime such as cybercrime, online scams, drug trafficking and smuggling, people smuggling and human trafficking and terrorism financing. Both sides acknowledged Viet Nam’s role in hosting the signing ceremony for the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime and recognised the importance of fostering regional and international cooperation to prevent and combat cybercrime.
5. Leaders agreed to promote cooperation in the legal and judicial fields and effectively implement the 2024 Statement of Intent on Continued Cooperation between the Attorney-General’s Department of Australia and the Ministry of Justice of Viet Nam. They also agreed to promote cooperation in mutual legal assistance, extradition and transfer of sentenced persons under the signed treaties between the two countries.

Enhancing Economic Engagement

1. Leaders welcomed the progress of economic, trade and investment relations after 5 years of implementation of the Enhanced Economic Engagement Strategy (EEES). They agreed to strengthen trade and investment ties and enhance economic resilience, including through Invested: Australia’s Southeast Asia Economic Strategy to 2040, to facilitate greater market access for each other’s products and business-to-business engagement. They recognised the role of Australia’s Deal Team in Ho Chi Minh City and Ha Noi to mobilise capital to finance development at scale in Viet Nam and acknowledged Viet Nam is a key focus of Australia’s blended finance portfolio, receiving over a third ($83 million) of Australia’s financing.
2. Leaders welcomed the Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in Agriculture and Sustainable Development and close cooperation in agriculture, fisheries and forestry as well as on advancing market access, including agreement to reinstate access for Australian kangaroo and deer meat to Viet Nam so trade can commence to Viet Nam as soon as possible in 2026.
3. Leaders emphasised the importance of resilient and diversified supply chains, including in critical minerals. They welcomed initiatives to deepen high-quality and sustainable investment, including Export Finance Australia’s (EFA) $1.3 billion in finance to support infrastructure development and exports to Viet Nam since 2017. 
4. Leaders reaffirmed their commitment to a predictable, transparent, open, inclusive, fair, sustainable and rules-based multilateral trading system, with a reformed World Trade Organization at its core. Australia welcomed Viet Nam’s joining of the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement. They reaffirmed their commitment to strengthening regional economic architecture and Australia reaffirmed support for Viet Nam as Chair of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership 2026 and host of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation 2027.

Harnessing Knowledge and Connecting People

1. Leaders recognised the strong and deepening people-to-people ties at the heart of the bilateral relationship. They affirmed that education, training and people-to-people links remain fundamental pillars of the bilateral relationship. Leaders agreed to strengthen cooperation in higher education, vocational education and training, joint research, student and academic exchanges, and professional development. Viet Nam recognises the valuable contribution of Aus4Skills over the past 10 years to human resource development and knowledge exchange, and welcomes a further 9-year investment (2026-2035).
2. Leaders agreed to further promote youth, cultural, sporting and tourism exchanges, thereby strengthening the social foundations of the bilateral relationship. They agreed to continue to facilitate business and leisure travel between our countries. Leaders reaffirmed their commitment to the Consular Agreement between Australia and Viet Nam, to facilitate friendly relations and cooperation between our two nations.
3. Leaders welcomed the Protocol to Amend and Supplement the Air Services Agreement. They welcomed education and research connections between the two countries and a Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in Vocational Education and Training. They appreciated RMIT’s contribution to international education in Viet Nam over a 26-year period and welcome stronger cooperation of Australian universities in contributing to the building of high-quality workforces in Viet Nam. They also welcomed the announcement of an amended Investment Registration Certificate for RMIT University’s campus in Hanoi.
4. Leaders renewed their commitment to promote and protect human rights in accordance with international law and to strengthen and contribute to the work of the United Nations Human Rights Council and its mechanisms. They affirmed that both countries would continue sincere, frank and constructive conversations, including through our annual Human Rights Dialogue. They committed to cooperating to foster inclusive societies that embrace and provide equal opportunities and respect for the human rights of all people, without discrimination of any kind.

Strengthening Climate, Environment and Energy Cooperation

1. Leaders discussed the prolonged impact of disruptions to global energy supply chains on their respective economies and welcomed the Joint Statement on Economic Resilience Cooperation and convening of the Ministerial Energy and Minerals Dialogue. They affirmed that accelerating the energy transition, including through electrification and renewable energy deployment, are critical enablers for each country to strengthen economic resilience, and welcomed increased cooperation between energy regulators. Viet Nam also appreciated Australia’s contribution and support for the ASEAN Power Grid.
2. Leaders agreed to continue strengthening cooperation in environmental protection, address climate change, and emissions reductions, thereby contributing to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals and international climate commitments. They recognised the importance of urgent climate action to deliver on the Paris Agreement, including successive Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) that reflect the highest possible ambition. They committed to enhance cooperation on NDC implementation, support the clean energy transition, and reach net zero by 2050. Leaders reaffirmed their shared commitment to enhancing cooperation in integrated water resources management (IWRM), water accounting and data-driven water governance, digital transformation, drought risk management, and the restoration of water resources and aquatic ecosystems, with the aim of advancing water security and strengthening climate resilience.
3. Viet Nam welcomed Australia’s leadership as COP31 President of Negotiations and support of Fiji and Tuvalu to host Pre-COP under the COP31 Pacific Partnership.
4. Viet Nam welcomed the implementation of Aus4Adaptation and recognised the contribution of this program in building capacity for adaptation to climate change in the Mekong Delta.
5. Leaders reaffirmed their commitment to deepening collaboration to address shared marine environmental challenges through marine science and monitoring, sustainable marine resource management and maritime domain awareness. They welcomed Australia’s Partnerships for Infrastructure program, including maritime decarbonisation, and recognised their commitment to the High Seas Biodiversity Treaty (BBNJ) to promote the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity.

Supporting Science, Technology, Innovation and Digital Transformation

1. Leaders welcomed deepening cooperation in science, technology and innovation, and work on digital transition and inclusion, including promoting the safe, secure and responsible development and deployment of emerging technologies. They welcomed the Joint Statement on the Enhancement of Science, Technology and Innovation Connectivity between Australia and Viet Nam.
2. Leaders welcomed the signing of a Health Cooperation Memorandum of Understanding to strengthen collaboration on health care, medical science and research.

Reinforcing Regional and International Cooperation

1. Leaders reaffirmed unwavering support for multilateralism, ASEAN and international law, including the United Nations Charter, which underpin regional peace, security and stability.
2. Leaders reaffirmed their commitment to a peaceful, stable and prosperous Indo-Pacific region that is inclusive, resilient and free from coercion, where sovereignty is respected and competition is managed responsibly. They reaffirmed the importance of strengthening collective capacity to respond to changing dynamics and emerging challenges in the Indo-Pacific region.
3. Leaders reaffirmed the importance of ASEAN centrality and the vital role of ASEAN and ASEAN-led mechanisms in maintaining an open, transparent, resilient, inclusive and rules-based regional architecture, which, inter alia, helps promote dialogue, cooperation, confidence building and transparency so as to reduce the risk of misunderstanding and miscalculation, to prevent crisis and conflict. They agreed to continue working closely to deepen the ASEAN – Australia Comprehensive Strategic Partnership, which is marking its 5th anniversary this year, and reaffirmed the importance of effectively implementing the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific (AOIP). They acknowledged the ASEAN Future Forum as a key initiative driving important discussions on ASEAN’s future.
4. Australia reaffirmed its strong support for ASEAN centrality, unity and cohesion, as well as ASEAN’s leading role in promoting dialogue, cooperation and confidence-building in the region. Leaders recalled their commitment in the ASEAN-Australia Joint Leaders’ Statement on Conflict Prevention and Crisis Management in the ASEAN-led Regional Architecture to strengthen cooperation through ASEAN-led mechanisms to promote open communication and dialogue, promote strategic trust, and maintain transparent, predictable and responsible conduct in order to reduce the risk of misunderstanding and miscalculation and prevent conflict in the region.
5. Leaders called for the implementation of the ASEAN Five Point Consensus on Myanmar. They called for immediate cessation of violence; unhindered humanitarian access; and genuine and inclusive dialogue.
6. Leaders expressed concern about the situation in the South China Sea and re-emphasised the importance of upholding peace, security, stability, freedom of navigation and overflight, unimpeded lawful commerce, respect for legal and diplomatic processes and peaceful resolution of disputes, without resorting to the threat or use of force, in accordance with international law, particularly the 1982 UNCLOS. They reaffirmed the UNCLOS sets out the comprehensive legal framework within which all activities in the ocean and seas must be carried out. They reiterated the importance of the full and effective implementation of the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of the Parties in the South China Sea in its entirety. They noted that any Code of Conduct on the South China Sea must be effective, substantive, in accordance with international law, particularly the UNCLOS, and not affect the enjoyment of the rights of any state under international law. They also highlighted the critical role that straits used for international navigation and sea lanes of communication play to global trade and economic security.
7. Leaders agreed to advance cooperation through the Mekong – Australia Partnership (MAP) to strengthen resilience and promote inclusive and sustainable development in the Mekong subregion.

Interestingly the market’s expectations for the rest of the year are pretty much back where they were the week after the last RBA meeting on 16 June

The difference is that 6 weeks ago or so, the market though that by the middle of next year rather than thinking about a rate rise, the RBA would be looking at a rate cut.

But now the market is expecting no change, but still an almost 50:50 chance of a rate rise sometime early next year.

Thankfully the market has stepped away from its belief of last month after the June labour force figures came out. Because those figures should employment was still growing nicely, the futures traders must have taken a big snort of .. .errr… powdered excitement.. and suddenly were betting on a rate rise by November and maybe another one next year.

Now reality of the economy seems to have returned and there seem little change on the horizon.

The forecast (bets) of the futures market does not mean anything other than speculators are thinking one way or the other, but it is rare for the RBA to totally go against the market’s expectations.

It also can be a pretty good guide – the market predicted rate were going to go up in 2022, before the RBA began doping so.

For now though, all is calm.

Australia is having to step up its response to the deadly bird flu virus, with wild populations at risk. Murray Watt and Julie Collins have held a press conference to announce the vaccination program for bird populations is being expanded (something countries like NZ have already done to try and protect their vulnerable birdlife)

Watt:

Australia’s birds are something that we all love, the sounds, the colours, the role they play in our ecosystems and that is why as a government we are determined to do everything we possibly can to protect them. 

Today’s announcement is another step in supporting our bird population to face up to the massive challenge of bird flu. As Julie has indicated let there be no doubt how serious a challenge this is, obviously for native wildlife but also for Australians as well.

As Julie has indicated he will see more mass mortalities of birds, that will be a very distressing thing for Australians and as a government we are determined not only to protect our birds as best we can also to support Australians through what is going to be a very difficult journey.

As the environment minister welcome this development and the announcement by Minister Collins to roll out targeted vaccinations of priority native species as we have heard Australia has been doing vaccination trails for some period of time and now we are making a commitment to roll out those vaccinations more broadly with the federal government supporting states and territories to vaccinate priority species that they identify based on expert advice.

As you may have heard Julie and me say, it is difficult to vaccinate birds in the wild. It difficult to calculate vaccination doses to vaccinate birds and it is difficult enough to catch wild birds once, let alone twice.

Where it is possible to vaccinate wild birds we will do so, but the priority is to vaccinate birds that are in captivity and in zoos and other institutions we have been taking steps to ensure we do have populations of our most vulnerable bird species and they are going to be the priority when it comes to vaccination.

We are taking this step now because of course the situation regarding bird flu in Australia is escalating.

We are taking a graduated response to step up that response as developments unfold, based on expert advice. So this announcement to broaden out our vaccination program is another step to protect our native birds and that builds on the steps that we have already taken over the last couple of years.

As you have heard me say before as part of the government ‘s $113 million investment in bird flu preparedness that has included $47 million investment towards wildlife resilience, to make sure that our wildlife is as resilient as possible for the bird flu arriving in the way that we expected it would.

That has done things like seal off enclosures in zoos to ensure that wild birds cannot make it in and spread it to captive population. We have increased our captive breeding populations in those zoos to make sure we do have viable populations of our most endangered species and we have eradicated feral animals and weeds to allow a better chance for those populations to thrive and be resilient for bird flu coming and now of course we are spreading towards vaccination.

As I say this will continue to be a serious event, we will continue to update you as developments unfold and again to all Australians the best thing you can do is avoid, record, report.

Avoid contact with what appeared to be sick animals, record what you see and reported to authorities so action can be taken.

Morgan Harrington

Earlier this morning I posted about the NSW Government inquiry into the modern slavery risks faced by temporary migrants, which has recommended that temporary migrants be granted access to Medicare “as a matter of priority.”

This is a specific problem for people in Australia as part of the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility (PALM) scheme because, even though they pay tax in Australia, they are ineligible for Medicare.

They are instead expected to purchase private health insurance. But the basic insurance policies that most of these people have often don’t cover the costs of care that might be required.

The committee found that temporary workers are at a risk of injury because of “substandard living and working conditions,” and that the trauma caused by temporary migrants who have experienced modern slavery can impact mental health. And women who fall pregnant whilst in Australia are usually not properly covered for the care they need. So people earning low wages to pick the fruit and vegetables that end up on Australian tables are left with medical bills they can’t afford. Is this the land of the fair go?

Australia Institute polling shows that two in three Australians (66%) support or strongly support PALM visa holders having access to Medicare while they are working in Australia. But, as the NSW inquiry makes clear, it is up to the Commonwealth to enact the necessary changes.

Luke Slawomirski

The combined amount Australians have lost to gambling since 1 July 2023 is currently at over $108 billion.

That’s almost $20 billion more than all Australian governments spend on schools each year.

Per person, our losses are the highest in the world. Online gambling has grown especially quickly, with adult participation rising from 8% in 2017 to 33% in 2025.

But the dollar tally captures only part of the damage.

Gambling harm shows up as financial stress, relationship breakdown, family violence, mental illness, substance use, job loss and homelessness. Money lost gambling is money that cannot be spent on food, rent, bills or healthcare.

The World Health Organization (WHO) warns that gambling can push households into poverty and food and housing insecurity. The harms also spread well beyond the person placing the bet. On average, six other people are directly affected by someone gambling at the highest-risk levels.

The link with suicide is especially disturbing. The Murphy Review found gambling is associated with around four times the risk of suicide, while almost one in five people presenting with suicidality also experience gambling harm.

Yet we still tend to treat gambling as a matter of individual responsibility: gamble “responsibly”, know your limits, walk away. That is a poor public health response to products that are heavily marketed, available around the clock and, increasingly, carried in our pockets.

The WHO and the 2024 Lancet Public Health Commission both argue that gambling harm requires population-wide prevention, rather than relying on individuals to protect themselves.

The Murphy Review recommended a national harm-reduction strategy, stronger national regulation and a comprehensive ban on online gambling advertising.

The ban on advertisements and inducements being debated in parliament this week is necessary. But effective public policy would recognise that gambling is a commercial product that predictably causes illness and harm.

Rod Campbell

As federal parliament considers gambling regulation, consider this.

Online gambling company bet365 is owned by one of the world’s wealthiest women, who pays herself 280 million POUNDS per year.

In Australia, bet365 files its taxes under the name Hillside (Australia New Media). This entity has won $1.3 billion from Australian gamblers over the last 8 years, yet claims to have never turned a profit and has never paid company tax.

What’re the odds of that???!

After Anthony Albanese invited the cameras in to capture his caucus rah rah yesterday, Angus Taylor did the same for the joint party meeting today.

You can tell he really means what he says because he used his hands a lot.

Bill Browne

Without consulting his federal colleagues, SA Labor Premier Peter Malinauskas has called a Royal Commission into Artificial Intelligence. He’ll be hoping despite South Australia’s small size, he can drive national policy.

He’s been successful on tech regulation before – getting the ball rolling on a social media ban by threatening to introduce it state-wide, before the Albanese Government introduced the nationwide ban.

One of the great features of Australia’s federal system is that even small jurisdictions can drive national change, just as the ACT is a policy inspiration for other states and territories.

There’s been early criticism that a Royal Commission is too slow moving for a fast-paced technology like the Artificial Intelligence Large Learning Models that have been improving exponentially in recent years. Federal shadow minister Aaron Violi and independent Kate Chaney have called for a parliamentary committee to consider the issue.

The more the merrier, I say. Artificial Intelligence threatens to change forever the economy, society, national security and what it means to be human. I think we can handle both a committee and a commission.

At 2pm, the RBA will announce the decision of its latest meeting of the monetary policy board.

The market is very much betting that nothing will happen:

There’s a couple reason why it will likely keep the cash rate at 4.35%.

The first is that there really is no need to do anything. Unemployment is mostly steady, if more inclined to be going up. Inflation is high, but going down and still dealing with all the noise and blather of the past energy subsidies, the oil prices rising and no idea what Trump is doing.

The other aspect is the CGT and negative gearing changes and the three rate rises in February, March and May have helped push down house prices. The RBA probably would not want the market to fall even more.

So basically no change.

And if the RBA does hike rate, then at 3:30 Michele Bullock, when she fronts the media, will have a lot of explaining to do.

Alice Grundy

NSW private schools have been in the headlines for all the wrong reasons in recent weeks. Yesterday the Sydney Morning Herald reported on evidence from survivors of Redeemer Baptist School at a parliamentary inquiry. The survivors spoke of physical, sexual, emotional and spiritual abuse. 

According the SMH, “The inquiry also heard that the school leveraged its government funding, fees and donations to amass a property portfolio worth an estimated $140 million.”

And NSW ICAC is currently “investigating allegations concerning people associated with the Liberal Party of Australia (NSW Division), the CEO of Catholic Schools NSW Dallas McInerney, property developer Jean Nassif, hotelier Michael O’Hara, certain Strathfield councillors and others”.

One of the allegations is that “Political donations, in amounts that were not declared and exceeded applicable donation caps, were made by Catholic Schools New South Wales, pursuant to payments arranged and approved by its Chief Executive Officer, Dallas McInerney, for purposes that included the recruitment and/or renewal of members to the Liberal Party”.

For anyone interested in how Australia ended up with one of the most privatised school systems in the world – and some ideas on what to do about it, I can recommend Jane Caro’s Vantage Point essay, Rich Kid, Poor Kid: The battle for public education. 

The Australian government constantly talks up the international rules-based order – but its willingness to uphold the principles that underpin it is inconsistent at best.

Human rights lawyer Chris Sidoti joins Dr Emma Shortis on After America to discuss the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry’s findings of Israel’s genocide in Gaza, the Trump administration’s attacks on the institutions of international law, and how the Australian government could act in support of a genuinely rules-based international system.

With the NDIS bill deal looking all but done with the Coalition – which will see thousands kicked off the scheme and therapy budgets cut, because this country can always be convinced that looking after people is not a priority – attention is turning to the gambling advertising regulation bill, that won’t actually do much to cut gambling advertising.

We have noted this before – but the theme of this government is the least possible. And the gambling advertising regulations – which would hurt no one but gambling companies, put no restrictions on gambling, or anything else other than where and how they can advertise their services – is a perfect example of that. The harm gambling causes to our community is exceptionally well documented. But the government doesn’t want to follow its own MP’s recommendations from a report it commissioned, and ban it.

So what we have is tinkering.

So now crossbenchers are trying to do what they can in the tinkering space, to try and lay the groundwork for changes in the future.

Monique Ryan wants to see some transparency in how sporting codes benefit from gambling revenue:

As parliamentary debate begins on the Albanese Government’s gambling bills, Independent Member for Kooyong, Dr Monique Ryan, will move amendments to require greater transparency about Australian sporting codes’ income from their financial relationships with betting companies. 

Says Dr Ryan: “Australia’s most popular sporting organisations are making tens of millions in tax-free income every year from their relationships with a predatory industry whose business model depends on profiting from their supporter base.”  

Australia’s two largest sporting codes, the AFL and NRL, receive an estimated $80 million each year in tax-free income from the gambling industry. These prominent and profitable groups remain exempt from income tax because sporting organisations are classified as not-for-profit entities under Australian tax law. 

Dr Ryan: “Sporting organisations receive tax concessions on the basis they exist to promote participation in sport and deliver a public benefit to the Australian community. That’s fair enough, but many of these institutions now generate enormous income from an industry that harms more than three million Australians every year. 

“The income tax exemption was designed in 1952 for volunteer-run suburban sporting clubs. It was never meant to support a billion-dollar professional competition that places a betting company’s logo on every page of its app. If the codes choose to continue to benefit from their financial ties with the gambling industry, we should consider whether it’s time for them to start paying tax on that income.” 

The AFL has a sponsorship deal with Sportsbet reportedly worth $100 million over seven years. At the same time, it receives an undisclosed cut on every bet placed on games, while AFL clubs are making millions from pokies revenue.  

“If a sporting organisation chooses to profit from gambling, those profits shouldn’t be subsidised by taxpayers,” says Dr Ryan. “It’s time for the AFL to make a choice: walk away from gambling sponsorship or pay tax on its gambling income.” 

This week, Dr Ryan will move amendments to the Interactive Gambling Amendment (Gambling Reform) Bill 2026, seeking greater transparency into the gambling-related income earned by major sporting codes. These amendments will call for the AFL, NRL and their clubs – as well as the Victorian Racing Club, and other not-for-profit sporting organisations with annual turnover above $50 million – to publicly disclose all gambling-related revenue.   

Dr Ryan: “These changes will not remove any tax concessions. What they will do is make sure that Australia’s largest income tax-exempt sporting organisations are subject to public accountability and reporting standards.” 

“Just two months ago, the government accepted the principle that public money should not support gambling-related activities, when we debated tax incentives associated with gambling research and development. If that was the view of the government in June, then it should be applied consistently today. We can’t keep giving wealthy sporting organisations tax concessions on gambling income while claiming to be serious about reducing gambling harm.” 

Snapshot: the AFL’s gambling revenue  

• In 2023, the AFL recorded operating revenues of $1.06 billion, an underlying operating profit of $27.7 million and total assets of $725 million, while paying no income tax. 

• It’s estimated the AFL receives as much as $40 million annually from betting agencies, and the NRL over $50 million. 

• The AFL, NRL, VRC and other Australian sporting codes enjoy not-for-profit status. They do not pay income tax on the profits generated from gambling revenue streams. 

• The Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education’s ‘State of Play’ report finds all NRL clubs, and five AFL clubs, are sponsored by gambling companies. 

• The league has faced public criticism for promoting bets with an 85% failure rate for bettors while itself taking a share of the resulting revenue. 

• Four Victorian clubs still operate poker machines despite having signed the “Love the Game, Not the Odds” pledge against gambling sponsorship. Those clubs collectively earned $40 million from poker machines in 2022/23 (Carlton $19.1m, Essendon $14.7m, Richmond $4.6m, St Kilda $1.8m). 

Fill in your census tonight, or you’ll be dealing with never ending reminders and threats of fines. That also goes for international tourists who find themselves in Australia tonight.

AAP

A meeting of middle power leaders in Canberra could pave the way to long-term economic benefit, according to foreign relations experts.

Vietnamese President To Lam will meet with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese in Canberra on Tuesday.

The president arrived in Sydney on Sunday night for his first visit to Australia as both leader of Vietnam and the national Communist Party.

This dual role of party and national leader is unusual and has been labelled a significant concentration of political authority by experts like Anne Vo, a senior lecturer of Vietnamese culture and politics at the University of Wollongong.

She said the visit was crucial as Vietnam was both a nation within China’s sphere of influence and an ally to the United States.

“For years, Australia and Vietnam have talked about the enormous potential in the relationship,” she told AAP.

“The question now is whether they start converting that potential into capital, companies, projects and long-term economic integration.”

Dr Vo said Vietnam has been considered “promising, but not urgent” by Australian business in the past but could offer economic security.

Huong Le Thu, a deputy director at the International Crisis Group, said the visit provided a chance to “exchange notes” as both nations faced international pressures from close allies.

“They need to be flexible and of course safeguard their national interests and red lines, but cooperate where they must,” Dr Le Thu told AAP.

“Whether either countries have a kind of recipe to deal with current turbulences or challenges yet to come is yet to be shown.”

Vietnam has one of the fastest growing economies in South-East Asia with Australia making efforts for half a century to secure a stronger relationship.

The latest move saw the signing of a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership in 2024.

Tuesday’s meeting is expected to discuss furthering defence and economic cooperation.

Dr Vo said the real test from the visit would be how both leaders referred to China and the United States and how Australia could fit within Vietnam’s so-called ‘bamboo diplomacy’.

Independent MP Allegra Spender will try and introduce an amendment to the gambling advertising legislation to ban inducements.

This is mostly symbolic, as the government has the numbers in the House and can pass whatever it wants in there. These are the conversations happening between the government and opposition in the senate, which the government look like capitulating on. Reading between the lines of what was being said yesterday, the deal with the Coalition is pretty much done, and these sorts of things will be banned.

Spender:

My amendment would ban gambling companies from offering sign-up bonuses, bet-matching offers, ‘bonus-bets’ and other incentives designed to lure new customers, encourage existing customers to bet more, and prevent problem gamblers from breaking out of their addiction.”

Support for stronger action is overwhelming. A survey of the Wentworth found community wide support for tougher gambling advertising laws, echoing the view of public health experts and researchers who have consistently identified inducements as one of the most insidious drivers of gambling uptake and problem gambling.  

Community voices and the evidence base are aligned: a ban on inducements must be part of any strengthened legislation.  

The Government’s current Bill doesn’t go far enough. Inducements are one of the most powerful tools gambling companies use to hook new customers and keep problem gamblers betting more, but the government’s Bill does nothing to stop them.

Last week, the Senate inquiry on this Bill heard horrifying evidence about the lengths gambling companies go to entice customers to continue placing bets, despite clear indications of problem gambling and addiction. 

The crossbench in both the House and the Senate has been calling for a ban on inducements and their advertising for a long time. This amendment gives the Government the opportunity to finally listen and deliver legislation that matches the scale of the problem. 

A clear, consistent framework is not just better for the community, it’s better for industry too. Gambling companies deserve certainty about what they can and can’t do, instead of being left in a grey zone that encourages companies in a race to the bottom. 

This amendment would impose a single consistent framework on gambling companies, rather than the current patchwork of rules that permit inducements to slip through.  

We know the harm gambling inducements cause – to problem gamblers, to young people watching sport with their families, and to household budgets already under pressure. Every day this loophole stays open is a day too many. 

I’ll be pushing the Government to adopt this amendment when the Bill is debated in the House. This is a rare area where there is genuine cross-party and crossbench agreement on the need for stronger action. The Government should take the win and strengthen its own Bill.” 

Morgan Harrington

Late last week, the NSW Parliament released the final report of its inquiry into the modern slavery risks faced by temporary migrants in the state. It’s a harrowing read that should disabuse anyone of the misapprehension that Australia is the land of the fair go.

The inquiry focused on people who come to Australia either as working holiday makers, or as part of the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility (PALM) scheme (which allows people from nine Pacific Island nations and Timor-Leste to work in Australia on a temporary basis). The inquiry found that “…too many temporary migrant workers have experienced, or are at a serious risk of experiencing modern slavery, in New South Wales.”

The release of the report came out just days after a Four Corners investigation highlighted specific cases in which labour hire firms operating in Coffs Harbour and the Nambucca Valley had abused workers on blueberry farms. In a submission based on confidential evidence, the state’s Anti-Slavery Commissioner Dr James Cockayne said the actions of some labour hire firms in the region “exhibited significant indicators of modern slavery, including forced labour, debt bondage, deceptive recruiting, and possibly trafficking in persons, servitude and sexual servitude.”

To those that have been paying attention, this is not news. Six reports specifically about labour on blueberry farms in the Coffs Harbour region have been published in as many years. As Dr Cockayne stated, “political actors of all stripes have been on notice for years that there is systemic labour exploitation in the berry industry in Coffs Harbour and the Nambucca Valley.”

The solution? Well, 13 of the 31 recommendations made by the inquiry urge the NSW Government to “advocate to the Australian Government” to make particular changes. The PALM scheme and the working holiday maker program are administered by the Commonwealth, which means it is up to the Commonwealth to make the changes needed to ensure that visitors to Australia are not put at risk of modern slavery.

With migration a red-hot political issue, enforcing the law against something everyone can agree is abhorrent seems like low-hanging blueberries.

Does he think that gambling advertising reform, is, as Sarah Hanson-Young suggested, a matter of ‘moral courage’?

Murray Watt:

I think that this is an issue that for many people has a strand of morality to it. And that is one of the reasons why the government is taking strong action when it comes to gambling advertising. I recognise there are many people in the community who have had a lot to say about the laws that we put forward, but it does need to be recognised that even the package that we intend to put to the Parliament before any amendments includes a range of things that will restrict the advertising of see of gambling on TVs, it will remove gambling advertising from players’ jerseys, from signage. It’ll strengthen the BetStop regime that allows people to get out of gambling altogether. It needs to be recognised that while the package that we have put forward may not meet every request from every group, it’s still representing the strongest package of anti-gambling advertising we have seen before.

Last night, Environment Minister Murray Watt was on ABC’s 7.30, where he was asked why Labor wasn’t budging on doing more on gambling advertising. Is Labor worried about a One Nation attack claiming Labor has made Australia a “nanny state”?

Watt:

No, it’s not about that from our point of view. I mean, what we’re trying to do is come up with a balanced package. You will remember when I spoke to at the time around the EPBC reforms late last year, that was is what we were striving for there. When it comes to the environmental reforms, it was about the balance between the environment and business.

Here, we’re trying to strike a balance between taking action against the very real problem of gambling addiction, and overuse of gambling advertising, on the other hand, people do have a right to have a punt whether it be on the races or football, and there’s issues relating to the financial viability of broadcasters, sporting codes.

Even the package that we have before us, before any amendments are made, will involve financial losses to sporting codes, to broadcasters, I’m not saying that shouldn’t happen, of course the gambling harm issue is a really important one for us to tackle, but there’s other factors that need to be taken into account here as well.

Hello and welcome back to parliament (for real this time).

The Spring session is about to get underway. It’s all about gambling reforms (where the Coalition are inching closer to giving Labor a deal) and the NDIS reforms (where it also looks like the Coalition will give Labor a deal) which means the major party duopoly is alive and well.

The Victorian election is looming behind everything, the South Australian government has just announced a royal commission into AI to get around the criticism of having signed a deal with Open AI, NSW is ICAC-ing and Queensland is holding its royal show, where the police stand is boasting of how many children it has locked up for ‘adult time’ (30,000 in case you were wondering).

So you know, things are not ideal.

Lucky we have you to help us get through this all and you have Mike Bowers photos (thanks to the New Daily) and a bunch of experts and fact checkers to guide you through the day. And me, Amy Remeikis, leading the descent into the abyss.

We also have the RBA meeting (where most economists expect the bank to hold rates, but prepare for anything with this board).

And it’s going to be a three coffee morning, which you know – means about five all up. Huzzah!

So ready? I hear you, but all we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us. Or something. (I’ve been watching more of the LOTR (extended edition) trilogy than is healthy, so prepare for too many allegorical references.)

Let’s get into it.