The Point Live: Future of Coalition still up in the air, Labor facing internal 'discomfort' over Herzog visit. As it happened.

It has been a week, and today the bad news seems to just keep on coming. It’s too much sometimes and today seems like one of those days.

So, enough of the politics. Free yourself to go and hug a loved one, or take a moment to do something that brings you some joy. Even if its standing under the shower and doing nothing. Sometimes, you just have to take a moment you know?

We will be back next Monday when the House will sit and the first of senate estimates gets underway. We’ll be bringing you all of that and more after a bit of a rest.

Again, thank you so much to everyone who has joined us – it is obvious on the numbers you are spreading the word and that means the world to us. It’s a small project, and we are still building, and we truly appreciate your support.

So until Monday, check back at The Point for any of the gaps between the news, and take care of you. Ax

Moves to legislate an independent commission for Indigenous kids have come at a critical juncture, as record numbers of young people are incarcerated.

The bill – which will create a dedicated advocate for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children – was introduced to federal parliament on Thursday by Social Services Minister Tanya Plibersek.

The commission currently operates under an executive agency under the Public Service Act. 

The national commissioner, Adjunct Professor Sue-Anne Hunter, said the bill’s introduction was the result of tireless advocacy and would grant the commission independent functions.

“Being able to have the enhanced powers to investigate systemic issues and compel information signals to our children and families that this isn’t a temporary measure,” the Wurundjeri and Ngurai Illum Wurrung woman told AAP.

“It says to Australia, it’s serious about accountability and systemic change.”

According to a Productivity Commission report released on Monday, 734 children are imprisoned across Australia on an average day – 62 per cent of them Indigenous.

The number of Indigenous children in detention surged in NSW, up 86 per cent since 2020-21, the data showed.

Prof Hunter said the commission’s work was urgent, particularly in driving down these figures.

“The shift needs to be investment from incarceration to prevent and early intervention to catch these issues earlier so people don’t end up in the system,” she said.

“There’s a lot of recommendations out there, like raising the minimum age of criminal responsibility to at least 14.”

In her speech in the House of Representatives, Ms Plibersek said experts and advocates had been calling for these reforms since the 1980s. 

“This bill gives the national commissioner powers to identify and call out persistent disadvantage demonstrated by these alarming figures,” she said.

“All too often, the views of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people are not heard in the decisions that affect their lives. 

“The measures in this bill will change that by listening to their experiences.”

Prof Hunter said no previous laws had put “our children first”.

“Statistics show that we are at risk of losing another generation to systems that have failed our people for generations,” she said.

“This is a bleak future, and one that we cannot allow for our children.”

The federal government will invest $33.5 million across four years to establish the commission as a permanent statutory agency and to resource its work. 

13YARN 13 92 76

Lifeline 13 11 14

Here is how Bowers saw the final QT of the week:

All Nationals MPs are still on all the committees, but you know – this is fun.

We finish question time earlier than we have all week because Albanese has to catch a flight to Indonesia where a new security agreement is about to be signed. He says of it:

Last year in Sydney I stood on the deck of the HMAS Canberra beside my friend President Prabowo Subianto. 

And I announced that Australia and Indonesia would take the next step in our bilateral relationship, securing a historic security agreement between our two nations and in about 40 minutes I will travel to Jakarta to formally sign that treaty.

Deepening the bond that we have honouring our long shared history and looking ahead to our shared future.

Our mutual security treaty commits our two nations to consult and a leader and ministerial level on security matters together and to consider any security responses together. It is a watershed moment in the Australia- Indonesia partnership.

A partnership that is based on friendship, trust, mutual respect and a shared commitment to peace and stability in our region.

But it is also part of our broader engagement with nations in the region and our investment in our relationships.

The alliance with PNG, the agreement with Timor-Leste, Tupelo and Nauru and a deeper engagement with as a yarn and Pacific Island Forum.

We live in the fastest growing region of the world in human history. Australia’s prosperity and our security lies within our region. And engaging with our neighbours and partners is vital to building a more peaceful, stable, prosperous and secure future for all of us and for generations to come.

Australia engages in our region as a neighbour, a partner and a middle power and our world matters and our word is respected because we back it up with action.

This treaty is a proud moment in the shared history of Australia and Indonesia and it will ensure that we work together to shape a better future, securing our shared place in the world so that we can secure the best outcome for those we serve here at home. 

Grogs informs me that Pauline Hanson asked the exact same question in the senate. She directed it to Katy Gallagher, who is the wrong person in the senate, but then after a back and forth Gallagher said she would give the numbers that are public, but not the ones which are commercial-in-confidence.

Barnaby Joyce gets a question (which just highlights how empty the Liberal party front bench is, given it’s completely empty where he and the teals sit in the chamber) and he asks:

My question is to the Treasury. Can the Treasurer please inform the house of the cost of the Commonwealth budget on the 25-26 year of the Commonwealth’s Capacity Investment Scheme is, and to assist the Treasurer, I believe they should be noted in the quantified contingent of liabilities.

Chalmers:

As the member for New England should know that because the Capacity Investment Scheme involves a number of negotiations, then those numbers are not typically published, but I can tell him that the Capacity Investment Scheme is unlocking $73 billion in private investment in renewable energy. Now, I know that the member for New England doesn’t support renewable energy, but on the side of the house we do, and we account for all of these investments in the usual way.

(Joyce just wanted to be able to talk about how much money is being ‘wasted’ on renewables

Senator Peter Whish-Wilson asks Senator Tim Ayres about a proposal to look opening up the Otway Basin off the Great Ocean Road to more gas fields, and how that fits with bushfires that closed the Great Ocean Road and the climate crisis.

Tim Ayres after wasting time addressing James Paterson, finally gets around to saying were Australia to not do such things it would be “bad on emissions, bad on jobs”.

His line is that gas is better than coal and therefore it is good for the climate. That is rather manure laden, and as for jobs, the gas industry is a minute employer and the profits of which great head overseas. Also this gas would be royalty free. So we give it to them for free and we barely tax it, so I’d love to know how this is a good outcome.  

Mark Ogge has dealt into this proposal pretty extensively

After a supplementary, Senator Aryes talked about how the government was undertaking “Practical action that actually makes a difference”. And yes, it does make a difference to gas company profits, He then suggests the Greens policy (which is that such a gas field should not be opened would be “Disastrous for the climate… disastrous for Australian industry”.

Given 80% of Australia’s gas goes overseas, and more gas is used by the gas industry in the process to turn gas into exported LNG than is used by the entire Australian manufacturing industry, I’m not sure what Australian industry he is talking about.

Senator Whish-Wilson then asks Senator Aryes what he has to say to South Australians who live not far from where these gas fields will be, and who are seeing mass fish deaths due to the impacts of climate change.  

Senator Ayres ends his response saying, “The Barefoot investor over there who has never seen a disaster he doesn’t want to politicise”.

Because yes, we should wait a very long time after a fires and floods to talk about the climate change that is causing them, I guess. Sigh.

The Nationals are back in 2023 with Darren Chester asking about the $275 energy saving price, which a whole ass election has been held in-between.

Chester wants Chris Bowen to say sorry, he will not say sorry.

Bowen:

I take responsibility for the energy system in Australia, I take responsibility for the minister as the minister for progress I take responsibility for dealing with the setbacks, that is what a minister does. And minister takes responsibility and deals with it, does not hide electric electricity rises before an election.

That is an option available but it is not an option that I have chosen to take.

I take responsibility for the progress, I take responsibility for dealing with setbacks and I take responsibility for the more than 1000 batteries that have been installed in the honourable members electorate, 1139 have been installed in the honourable members electorate since July 1 and I know that in Victoria the wholesale price of energy in May 2022 was $233 hour and today $37 a megawatt hour and I take responsibility, Mr Speaker for all of the above.

In Got a minute?, an advice column in the Sydney Morning Herald, a father describes returning to work after three years of parental leave and only to find himself sidelined and effectively boxed out of his career.

For many women, this is not a surprising story. It’s the norm.

Caring responsibilities mean that many highly qualified women find themselves in roles with lower pay, reduced responsibility and little opportunity for career progression.

Because of this, they are earning only a fraction of their former salaries.

Nationally, the gender pay gap is still between 11.5 and 22 per cent – and it gets wider after having children.

Women returning to male-dominated or senior roles are especially vulnerable to being sidelined and boxed out of senior positions, and current workplace legislation does little to address this.

The Centre for Future Work has proposed creating new systems to evaluate work value that would replace old standards based on skills and qualifications in male-dominated roles. Legislation from 2022 means that this is already the case in some female-dominated industries.

If Australia is serious about closing the gender pay gap, mothers shouldn’t be punished for stepping away to care for their children. Amending the Fair Work Act to stop employers from penalising parents who take time off to care for children could help protect them.

To learn more about the harsh reality behind the gender pay gap, check out this episode of Dollars and Sense.

Sussan Ley then asks about another economist who agrees government spending is to blame for inflation and another round of WILL YOU APOLOGISE, which, sigh.

Albanese tries to make the old economist joke about asking two economists a question and getting three opinions, but saying that you can have 10 economists in a room and get 12 opinions but he mangles the delivery and leaves people wondering if he can count.

Tony Burke takes a dixer on the new WA terror event declaration and says:

It is alleged now there is always a gap between the action and while we often, there is often a period where people are saying can you call it terrorism yet in the period of delay.

That is because terrorism is not defined simply by the action but also by the motivation.

And we need to give police time to do their work to be able to get the strongest case together with respect to motivation. 

The motivation that will be alleged is a national racially motivated ideological cause. White supremacist ideology has no place in modern Australia and no place in our country. When someone is made to feel unwelcome, made to feel like they do not belong the message from Australia and from this parliament has to be that we stand with you. 

While there was not specific intelligence on this occasion at a time when the national threat alert level is at probable there are times when people have information and they are not sure whether it may be helpful the request from agencies is to please report it.

The National security hotline is 1800 123 400 for people to use for any information they think may constitute a risk to public safety.

This is very political so it it right up Albanese’s alley – asked about the importance of International Womens’s Day, Albanese publicly defends Ley against a ‘disgraceful’ headline, which is a nice double whammy of political play.

Albanese:

Greater equality to women essential to our government has mac agenda, because it’s fundamental to Australia’s success. It is not an add-on or a nice to have, it is not confined to an individual portfolio, or treated as a matter of special interest, it is about the national interest.

This is about the investments that we make to close the gender pay gap, to boost economic opportunity, to address the national scourge of violence against women.

Equality for women is also about the standards and example the culture we are part of, and the language that we use. And last week, the nightly published a piece by Aaron Patrick under the headline, ‘why I wouldn’t marry Sussan Ley’.

That headline is a disgrace, and the article is no better. I don’t intend to quote from it any further. You really only need to know one thing about it. That article would never have been written about a male political leader.

One of the lessons I would hope that this parliament and those who observe it have learned from Julia Gillard’s time as Prime Minister is that is not enough to shake our heads at this stuff in private. As leaders, we have a responsibility to call it out, and today, as prime minister, I call it out. Mr Speaker, this can and should be a place for passionate argument, it is a contest of ideas, it is a healthy thing in a democracy. But we need less hatred in our national discourse.

We need less polarisation, we need fewer attempts to provoke outrage or simply manufacture it. Not everything needs to be dialled up to 11.

This is a great country, and we all love it, we are all here to serve it and we should work together to set and uphold a better standard. That is a responsibility that all of us have in this place, but it’s also a responsibility that people who comment on national affairs have, as well.

The opposition does not associate themselves with those remarks.

Over in the Senate I am mostly awake as I watch our brightest minds watch wits.

It opened with James Paterson thinking he had Katy Gallagher in a big gotcha moment.

Yesterday in a reply to a question she had said that the Howard government was the biggest spending government. Paterson wanted to know in which year the Howard govt spent more than the budget estimates will be spent this year.

Gallagher had to admit that she got it wrong and that the Morrison government was the biggest spending government and that she had misspoke and meant to say the Howard government was the biggest taxing government.

Paterson then wanted to know how she could get a figure so wrong that was in the government’s own budget papers and why she didn’t correct the Hansard immediately. Scandal!!!!

I don’t have the transcript, but Senator Gallagher essentially said, “Sit down twerp, I messed up the names and also do you not hear what I am saying? The Howard government was the biggest taxing government, so your gotch is quite stupid”

Jim Chalmers is answering a dixer on inflation and Dugald has to threaten the Liberal and National MPs with losing the MPI debate (the matter of public importance debate, which is just different versions of why the government is the worst government ever, and is the one hour of the day the opposition can kinda control the flow – plus it lets them all have something to put on their socials) so they settle down.

Chalmers is then asked by Super Ted (who really thinks he is on to something here)

Yesterday in question time, the treasurer referred to his responsibility, and actually refused to take the fun stability for rising interest rates by quoting ANP economist Diana Mousina. But today, Ms Mousina told the AFR the treasurer had cherry picked her comments, and that she, and I quote, “Didn’t say the government was not contributing to inflation”.

Will the treasurer apologise for misrepresenting Ms Mousina’s comments?

Chalmers:

First of all, I think I have said a number of times through the course of this weekend before that, I take response ability for all aspects of my job, including our part in the against inflation. I think I’ve made that very clear, and repeatedly so.

Now, when I quoted the economist that the shadow Assistant Treasurer is referring to, I made it really clear, Diana Mousina, when I quoted her from her interview on the ABC on Tuesday morning, I was making two points very clear, and both of these points still stand.

First of all, there is not a unanimous view amongst economists, the view pushed by those opposite, that remains the case.

And secondly, the quotes that I used from the interview that she gave on Tuesday morning on the ABC reflects the factual point that what we saw in the economy in 2025 was public demand growth making a smaller contribution to demand in the economy, and private demand growth making a bigger contribution to growth in the economy.

Now, I understand that those opposite are so desperate in their current political condition, but they cannot deny the fact that the story of the economy in 2025 was the faster than expected recovery in the private economy, and if they don’t want to take my word for it, Mr Speaker, then they should take the word of the Reserve Bank governor, who said growth in private demand has strengthened substantially more than expected.

The RBA governor, private demand is growing more quickly than expected. In a statement on monetary policy, private demand was much stronger than expected. In a statement of monetary policy, the near upward revision is driven by public demand.

In the press conference, private demand has turned out to mean much stronger than we were forecasted. In a statement on monetary policy, the contribution of public demand to year end GDP growth has continued to ease in recent quarters.

And that’s the point that a number of economists have made, it’s a point that I had made, it’s not a political opinion, it’s not an economic opinion, it’s a fact in the national accounts, released in recent times.

Helen Haines asks Kristy McBain:

Bushfires are still burning in Victoria and thus far over 75% of homes lost and private land burnt is in my electorate of Indi. My electorate is grateful for the support provided by the government today but so much more is needed.

Minister, what further support beyond that already announced can communities in my electorate expect from the Commonwealth?

McBain:

I acknowledge her community is going to a particularly tough time at this point in time. Many Victorians have been impacted by bushfires that have burned through over 415,000 hectares across Victoria and has had a major impact on communities across that place. 

Can I again thank the member for Indi and the member for Nicholls for inviting me into their local communities? It is really important in this role to hear first-hand from communities about what they going to need, not only in the short term but in the long and medium term as well. 

Can I thank the members in the region of Ruffy who I met in particular? I said the other day, they were so worried about their local environment, let alone their own homes, and I had very clearly from them their desire to see the Ruffy community centre rebuilt, which they lovingly referred to as the TCC, so we’ll continue to work with your community on those things.

I also listened really closely from the member council members about the need to make sure infrastructure is built back more resilient and that we work on those community cohesion projects to get into the future.

As the member knows, the Prime Minister announced another package of supports. $158 million, going to things like extended power outages for businesses, clean up support for community members, temporary accommodation, rebates for people who need to clean out water tanks, and mental health support in particular, and we will continue to extend support where it’s needed, and we will work with the Victorian government on that.

We have enacted over $330 million in that state Commonwealth disaster recovery funding arrangements already. 

However, we recognise that the state and local councils are the best place to identify the type and level of assistance that is going to be required, following this disaster, in accordance with their responsibilities for disaster management, so the Albanese government will continue to work really closely with the Allan Labor government, and with local councils and local communities in particular, to understand where supports and assistance is going to be kneaded into the future. And our government stands ready, willing and able to assist when they support packages come forward. We know that recovery isn’t a straight line.

It’s not going to be a speedy process, so our commitment is to continue to work with all levels of government and local communities to see this recovery tale through, and we stand ready, willing and able to support as we can, when we can.

Today the tax policy talk is about the Government changing the capital gains tax discount.

So, a quick reminder – capital gains are essentially the profit you make buying and selling assets (for eg shares or an investment property)

If you bought a house for $400,000 and then sell it a few years later for $800,000 you have made a $400,000 capital gain (ignoring all the legal fees etc). With the 50% discount you would only pay tax on $200,000 – the other $200,000 is tax free.

This is not how it always was. Before 1999 the amount of the capital gain you had to pay tax on was determined by the level of inflaiton over the time you held the asset. John Howard and Peter Costello thought a 50% tax free discount was much nicer. At this point we should remember that John Howard HATED (and I mean HATED) the capital gains tax. He wanted to get rid of it after Paul Keating introduced it in the 1980s, but failed at a couple elections to do so.

So he just undermined it by cutting it in half.

There will be a lot of talk from the Liberal Party that this is the govenment raising taxes on mum and dad investors. But the ATO tax stats let us know who earns capital gain and who pays the capital gains tax (and thus get the discount).

It turns out most of you reading this have never earned a capital gain.

People who earn less than $100,000 a year make up around three quarters of all tax payers, but they earned just 11% of all capital gains. By contrast those who earn more than $1m a year total just 0.2% of all taxpayers, but make up 46% of all those who earn capital gains, and 52% of those who pay capital gains tax

So no, this is not a tax on mum and dad investors, it is reducing the taxbreak that overwhelmingly goes to the very richest, and which also gives a huge boost to housing investors and caused housing affordability to collapse.

Sussan Ley has the first question and it is back to inflation and the interest rate increase (which is not an inherently bad tactic, given the Liberals have not focused on anything, let alone cost of living for quite some time)

But it’s the same question we have been hearing all week and Albanese can just treat it like a dixer. Which he does.

Ley:

Last year the Prime Minister promised Australians that inflation was under control and that his government had, quote, ‘done all it can’. Yet Australians have now been hit with the 13th interest rate increase under this Prime Minister and the average mortgage holder is paying around $23,000 more a year just to keep a roof over their head. Prime Minister, is it still your position that inflation is under control?

Albanese:

Of course we know that Australians are still doing it tough and with cost of living take some of the pressure off. Inflation had a six in front of it and was rising when we came to office and it now has a three in front of it but we want to get it down.

We want to get it down. And that is why we are focused on achieving just that. And in the OECD annual report of January just one month ago, they had a lot to say about inflation and the position that Australia finds ourselves in. 

They said headline inflation peaked close to 8% in late 2022 as somewhat lower and later peak than in many OECD countries. They went on to say … about wages incomes when inflation surged, in 2021-23 as price — price rises outpaced nominal income gains, incomes and Australia have risen since 2022. They went on to say in regard to the economy and the Budget that Australia’s resilience during the shocks of the past half decade fits with its avoidance of recession, supported by prudent fiscal policy and credible monetary policy.

Indeed, we will continue to do what we can to provide support for people, the opposition like to talk about the Budget but they never talk about what they plan to cut. We know that at the last election. They planned to increase our taxes paid by every single Australian and we know that the person who is now being put in charge and not just the Shadow Treasurer up at the shadow assistant at the same time has committed some $600 billion to a nuclear plant at the last election. 

They wanted to sack 41,000 frontline public servants and they wanted to increase income tax for every taxpayer.

Dan Tehan then has a point of order that Dugald Dick warns him against raising because the PM is being relevant, but Dan Tehan listens to no one and asks it. And then Duglad has to get mean because not only is it not a point of order, he verbals what the question was and that makes Dugald very mad.

Tehan is told to sit down immediately. And even Tehan’s brain clocks that Dugald is not playing today and sits.

Albanese drones on some more:

The fact is that we are getting on with being focused on the needs of the Australian people. They are just focused on each other. They just focused on each other. Liberals focused on other liberals and Nationals focus on other national, people joining the crossbench and now talk of a 3-way coalition with Pauline Hanson.

And then he sits

But first, Anthony Albanese has to make a statement on the WA declared terrorist act:

I can inform the house that the West Australian government has confirmed that the Western Australia joint counterterrorism team comprising WA police, the Australian Federal Police and ASIO has charged one man yesterday, a 31-year-old male with engaging in a terrorist act.

That offence carries a maximum sentence of life in prison. I was briefed yesterday in person by the AFP Commissioner and the Commissioner of the police for Western Australia on the investigation and I particularly thank the Commissioner from WA for travelling here to give an in person briefing.

As an individual has now been charged I will use the word allegedly.

On January 26 the man is alleged to have thrown a home-made explosive device into the crowd at a rally in Perth. This was a gathering of our fellow Australians, exercising the democratic right to express their views and participate in a peaceful demonstration. They were allegedly targeted because they were Indigenous.

This alleged act of terrorism was deliberately aimed at Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. Mr Speaker, this was alleged terrorism driven by racism and hatred. Hate that should have been banished to the dark reaches of history yet still lives in the dark corners of the Internet. 

The device did not detonate but that does not change the fact that this attack was real. And the intended consequences would have, indeed, been horrific. Death, injury, trauma beyond imagining. I know that First Nations people around Australia are grappling with that.

The combination of disbelief, anger and real fear and I have met with a number of Indigenous leaders in the last 24 hours about this. As a government, as a parliament and as a nation we see you and we stand with you.

We will do everything required to keep you and your loved ones safe. There is no place for racism, for hatred in our nation. It is an offence against our Australian values and it is an offence in Australian law. Importantly, the joint counterterrorism team does not believe there is any residual risk from the alleged perpetrator. Mr Speaker, Australia has been enriched by every faith background and tradition.

People all over the world united by their love of this country. And only Australia has the privilege of being home to the oldest continuous culture on earth. 

And we all share that privilege either those who have come here or who are descendants of people who have come here. That is a source of pride for all of us and something that all of us have a responsibility to safeguard.

On that, let us stand united as a parliament, as Australians in support of a nation and let us reach out at this time, which will be difficult as some details are further, no doubt, will come out as part of this process. It will be a difficult time for Indigenous Australians and we stand with them at this time.

Sussan Ley associates the Liberal party with those remarks. She manages to get through it without making it a political attack. Rare.

There’s been a lot more reporting on the Government considering reform to the capital gains tax (CGT) discount. This is good news, the CGT discount costs about $20 billion a year, worsens inequality and makes houses more expensive.

In fact, it’s so bad that traditionally cautious organisations have started calling for reform, including the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (headed by former Liberal Minister Mathias Cormann) and the NSW Treasury.

What is the capital gains tax discount?

When you buy an asset and then later sell it for a profit, the profit you make is taxed as income; this is called capital gains tax (CGT). The CGT discount means that if you buy an asset (often a house), hold it for 12 months and then sell it, you only pay tax on half the profit you made. For example, if you bought a property for $400,000 and a year later sold it for $500,000, you have made a capital gain of $100,000. The discount means you only have to pay tax on $50,000.

NSW Treasury call for reform

NSW Treasury is the NSW government department responsible for financial management and economic policy and advice. NSW Treasury is responsible for the largest state budget in the country. In a recent submission to a federal Senate inquiry into the CGT discount, NSW Treasury has called for reforming the tax concession, using forceful language (at least government department language terms):

there is a strong case for reviewing the CGT discount to ensure it is fit for purpose, supporting fairness, efficiency, and sustainable economic outcomes, and better aligning with contemporary housing and equity objectives

Top diplomats from Australia and Germany have hinted at progress on a long-stalled free trade agreement with Europe while agreeing to closer cooperation on critical minerals, energy, cyber security and climate change.

During talks in Canberra, the foreign ministers for both countries agreed to work more closely together to bolster critical minerals supply chains, which are currently dominated by China.

Germany is a major user of rare earths like lithium which are used in car manufacturing, defence technologies and renewable energy – elements which Australia has in spades.

“The central issue of the talks here is a closer and important co-operation in the field of critical raw materials, such as rare earths. And that is a question of economic security,” German foreign minister Johann Wadephul told reporters in Canberra.

“We must diversify our supply chains, and we must cooperate as closely as possible,” he said.

Foreign Minister Penny Wong said so-called “middle powers” like Australia and Germany needed to work together amid global uncertainty.

“As middle powers, we want to contribute to a world where no country dominates and no country is dominated,” she said, speaking alongside Dr Wadephul.

“Middle powers are active. Middle powers are ambitious.”

Both leaders also discussed the years-long negotiations over an Australia-EU free trade deal, which appear to be making progress.

Plans are being drawn up for Trade Minister Don Farrell to meet his European counterpart before European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen travels to Australia in the coming weeks.

Dr Wadephul said his country would be “constructive and positive” in the negotiations.

“These negotiations now have to be had, particularly in the agricultural sector. They are challenging, which is not surprising,” he said.

Australia has been trying to strike a free trade deal with Europe for the best part of a decade, but disputes over naming conventions for products like feta cheese and prosecco have proved to be major stumbling blocks.

Those disagreements caused talks to collapse in 2023, but they have now resumed.

“It is important to have another go, and I think we’ll be successful,” Dr Wadephul said.

Senator Farrell, who is leading the talks on the Australian side, said there had been good progress on the deal.

“We are a lot closer,” he told reporters in brief remarks on Tuesday.

It is the downhill slide into QT, so make sure you grab yourself something to get you through the day.

It is one of those days where you are going to need it.

The alleged throwing of a homemade bomb into an Invasion Day rally crowd has been declared a terrorist act.

Thousands of people were evacuated on January 26  from Forrest Place in Perth’s city centre after police found an object containing volatile chemicals, nails and metal ball bearings.

The explosive device, which failed to detonate, was thrown by a 31-year-old man at the 2500-strong crowd of Indigenous people, families and supporters, police allege.

WA Premier Roger Cook said the alleged attack had now been determined to be act of terror. 

“We must condemn this incident in the strongest possible terms, and we must call it for what it is,” the premier said on Thursday. 

“The WA joint counterterrorism team comprising WA Police, the Australian Federal Police and ASIO have determined the incident last Monday in Perth should be charged as a terrorist act.” 

Charges against the 31-year-old, who remains in custody, have been upgraded to engaging in a terrorist act. 

“This charge, which has been laid by the Joint Task Force, alleges the attack on Aboriginal people and other peaceful protesters was motivated by hateful, racist ideology,” he said.

“This is the first time this charge has been laid in Western Australia.” 

A Perth magistrate granted a suppression order on the man’s identity because of fears for his safety.

The ill-fated attack rocked the community and the country in the wake of the Bondi attack on December 14. 

“I know this event has impacted people Australia wide, and it is deeply felt by our indigenous communities –  I know that there is anger, we have every right to be angry,” Mr Cook said. 

“Any attack on our First Nations people is an attack on all of us, and this is not what it means to be Australians, but we must allow police to complete their investigation so that justice process can take place.”

Western Australian authorities, including the premier, are holding a press conference to announce the the Boorloo (Perth) Invasion Day protest attempted attack has officially been listed as a declared terrorist act and a terrorism charge has been laid against the accused.

The official response is ‘we have to do the investigation to make sure it reached the threshold’ but I think we can all tell what spurred this (Indigenous people having to go above and beyond that people saw what happened in the original response to the attempted attack).

As has been mentioned, this has everyone snickering – the Coalition break up is getting nasssty. The Liberals are now moving to kick all the Nationals off Coalition committee lists. It’s so sad when mums and dads can’t get along for the kids.

Zali Steggall, Sophie Scamps and Andrew Wilkie have expressed their discomfort with the pending visit of Israeli President, Isaac Herzog, given the allegations he has incited genocide.

Penny Wong says Australia is comfortable in its international legal obligations (which given we belong to the ICC would suggest we should attempt to arrest Herzog) and have still invited him (which is diplomatic speak for ‘we won’t attempt to arrest him’.)

The three independents say his visit is a threat to social cohesion, given Israel’s actions in Gaza, where it has accepted that it has killed at least 70,000 people (the actual figure is expected to be much, much higher and is growing every day).

Steggall:

Whilst I stand absolutely with the Australian Jewish community in their trauma and horror on the back of the Bondi terrorist attack, it can’t be that precludes continuing to have an issue with the conduct of the State of Israel and their disregard for international law and human rights. We must, as a democratic nation, be able to stand in solidarity with our multi faith multicultural community, with Australian Jewish communities who are really, absolutely traumatized from the rise in anti semitism, the rise in hate and and the terrorist attack.

But we must also be able to stay critical of a nation that is not conducting itself in compliance with international law, with human rights, and I would say Australian values, and that is the conflict that many in our communities have struggled with. And that is what this visit by President Herzog – and I accept – I’ve had representations from many in the Jewish community who argue that he is not involved in the Government of Israel, that he is, like our Governor General, a head of state, but he is nonetheless an elected head of state.

He is nonetheless mentioned in the International Court of Justice proceedings, and he has been outspoken in blaming and holding all Palestinians responsible for the actions of a terrorist organization. And that has been referred in proceedings as incitement to genocide, and that is problematic.

The Housing Australia Future Fund, also known as the HAFF is back in the news. For those that had forgotten, this was the fund the Government set up to build more social and affordable housing. But rather than use the money to… you know… build more homes, someone thought it would be a much better idea to invest the money and then use some of those returns to build more homes.

Because why simply build more homes when instead you can come up with a convoluted way to make it more complicated.

Well, that complication seems to be catching up with the HAFF. It has been reported that Labor have had to make sweeping changes after constant delays that has slowed the roll out.

Who would have thought that making something unnecessarily complicated might slow things down?

Here is the current version of how the HAFF is supposed to work.

Step 1: Government deposits billions of dollars in the HAFF

Step 2: This money is invested and earns a return on those investments

Step 3: Some of those returns are lent at concessional rates to developers to encourage them to build affordable homes

Step 4: Developers take concessional loans and use that money to build more affordable homes

Step 5: More affordable homes are built

Perhaps instead the government might have done this.

Step 1: Government builds more public housing

Step 2: More public housing is built

If that seems too simple, you could always give the money to State Government Housing Authorities and get them to build more public housing.

The housing crisis is happening now. Everyone agrees that building more homes will improve housing affordability. Finding novel ways to delay the building of more homes is clearly the wrong solution.

Come on Labor, cut out all the unnecessary steps and get on with it.

Since the RBA raised rates on Tuesday, the Liberal Party and some of their friendly economists in the media have been banging on about public spending driving up inflation .

It all can get a bit dreary economic, and so Susan Ley dumbs it down by talking about debt and household budgets.

But let’s not be so dumb. The issue is not debt, but that in an economy like Australia there is a finite amount of resources to do everything – especially workers. You can’t just go the tap and pour out another 100 construction workers any time you need to build a block of apartments. Yes, we do have skilled migration, but even that is limited. So, if you have low unemployment – like we do – then each new big project is not so much creating jobs as it is taking jobs away from somewhere else.

Right now, the unemployment rate for construction workers is around 2.7% (compared to 4.1% overall) and there are roughly 1.7 unemployed construction workers for every vacancy. So it is a pretty good time to be looking for work in construction. That also means if a government wants to build public infrastructure or to encourage more housing, it is having a hard time finding the labour.

At such times we need then to think very carefully about our priorities.

Public infrastructure like roads, bridges, rail, and the NBN are all pretty high priorities. The government could of course say “no more fixing of roads, or improving the NBN, because that spending is driving up inflation”.

That might satisfy Ted O’Brien and the economists who blame government spending for inflation, but it would leave our economy pretty stuffed (not to mention our communities).

We also know that improving housing supply is a massive need. And with that again also comes the need for public infrastructure to service those new residential areas – roads, rail, water and sewerage, NBN etc etc etc.

And to do that we need a lot of construction workers and also more money to be invested in that public construction.

But right now that is made harder purely because of the gas industry,

In the past year, the amount of investment spent building oil and gas mines was more than half the entire amount spent on all public infrastructure – and more that the entire amount spent on roads, bridges and railways.

When you hear about new gas mines being approved that means workers are being enticed away from working on public infrastructure construction to instead fly-in-fly-out building a mine.

The government love to say that a new mine will “create thousands of jobs”. What they really should say is it will take thousands of workers away from building roads, rail, the NBN and importantly houses.

So yes the government can do something to limit inflationary pressures – it could stop approving gas mines that we don’t need because we already send 80% of Australia’s gas overseas, we should not have because they massively contribute to climate change, but also because they use scarce resources that drive up inflation and makes building homes more costly.

Independent senator Lidia Thorpe says the sale of defence land is a “land and cash grab” that won’t see any public good – and traditional owners are yet to be consulted.

Thank you to Glenn for taking us through that hour – he is now running through a field screaming with happiness at being unshackled.

You have Amy Remeikis back with you

It’s two and a half years since the Murphy Report, which suggested a number of important reforms to protect Australians – in particular, children – from the evils of gambling advertising.

The report, passionately driven by the late Labor MP Peta Murphy, recommended a phase-out of online and television gambling advertising.

The common-sense reforms have the backing of experts, voters, Labor MPs and even some gambling companies.

They were even backed by Peter Dutton while he was Liberal leader. He supported a ban on gambling ads one hour before and after key television sporting events – again, with young viewers particularly in mind.

So why is Labor dragging its feet?

You don’t have to watch much sport on television (free to air, pay tv or any of the streaming services) to see huge volumes of gambling advertising and sponsorship of live sport and analysis programs.

It makes media companies a lot of money. In the case of free-to-air tv, executives have issued breathless warnings that a blanket ban would send stations broke.

Same with the sporting codes. Nearly all our major codes have incredibly lucrative deals with betting companies.

So this is the choice … protect kids … or protect media and sporting profits?

It’s not just Labor backbenchers who are becoming increasingly frustrated at the lack of action on this issue.

The Greens, Independents and even the Nationals today supported a Greens bill to set up a Senate Inquiry into gambling advertising.

Shamefully, Labor and Liberal blocked it.

One cause of inflation is when costs go up and businesses pass them on to consumers by raising the prices they charge for goods and services.

The Reserve Bank loves to talk about this aspect when it comes to labour costs and wages. Any sign of wages rising is met with alarm and brings about the RBA wanting to raise rates to increase unemployment and (it hopes) lower wage growth.

But here is Australia’s best kept secret: just like homeowners, businesses also have to pay interest on their loans. And this adds to their costs and is then passed on to consumers.

So the Reserve Bank actually contributes to the inflation that it is trying to reduce with higher interest rates.

The Australian Industry Group knows this and just before the latest interest rate increase it said “Without a significant moderation in cost pressures on business, the wave of investment needed to kick-start private-sector growth will not materialise”.

And what do those cost pressures include? AIG answers: “increased borrowing costs if Australia’s persistent inflation…resulted in the RBA raising interest rates at its meeting next week”. That is precisely what the Reserve Bank did.

The following graph shows how official interest rates have moved since their low point of 0.10% from March 2020.

It takes a long time for official rates to flow into new business loans but eventually they do as is shown in the next graph.

This is the cost of interest payments for non-financial corporations (which is basically all companies but not banks and insurers). These are annual figures based on national accounting data.

Clearly, the interest rate rises in 2022 and 2023 have been gradually increasing the expenses of corporations making goods and services. Just like labour costs and commodity prices, these interest costs are going to be passed on to consumers.

We would be naïve indeed if we thought that those interest costs were not going to be passed on to customers.

When the Reserve Bank increases interest rates, the intention is to reduce aggregate demand which should then put downward pressure on prices.

The Reserve Bank also knows that its decisions influence business costs, so it is effectively betting that the demand effect in lowering prices is stronger than the cost push effect that raises prices.

That ain’t necessarily so, especially if the Reserve Bank is mistaken in its diagnosis that demand pressures have been the culprit in causing inflation. 

It is two years to the day since Australian writer Dr Yang Hengjun was given a suspended death sentence in a sham, secret trial on trumped-up espionage charges in China.

Dr Yang wrote a letter to supporters last year, speaking of the “unbearable” conditions in prison but saying he hadn’t given up hope of one day making it home to his family.

Amnesty International says he’s been interrogated more than 300 times by 30 different authorities.

Despite Australia’s much-improved relationship with China under the Albanese government, there’s no sign of Dr Yang’s release.

Foreign Minister Penny Wong has just released a statement:

Dr Yang has demonstrated remarkable resilience and fortitude in the face of great challenges for the past seven years of his detention. The Australian government has made clear to China that we remain appalled by Dr Yang’s suspended death sentence. Dr Yang is entitled to basic standards of justice, procedural fairness and humane treatment, in accordance with international norms and China’s legal obligations. We advocate consistently for Dr Yang’s welfare and conditions. Today our thoughts are with Dr Yang and his loved ones. We want to see him reunited with his family.

Fresh from Bob Katter’s hissy fit over the inadequacy of the federal government’s beer tax freeze …

Queensland opposition leader Steven Miles has cut together a little protest video over the state government’s plan to make being drunk in public a crime.

This week’s carping about the impact of government spending on inflation sums up why the Liberals are losing voters – and relevance – by the day.

One of the party’s best performers, Senator James Paterson, appeared on television this morning and was given the opportunity to explain exactly which spending which the Liberals were talking about.

After all, they’ve asked repeated questions about it during Question Time.

So, if ever the Liberals or coalition find themselves in a position to form government again, what would they cut? How would they fix this so-called “spending crisis” which they won’t shut up about?

Senator Paterson could come up with one idea. One.

That was to cut tax incentives for Australians who buy electric vehicles, which has blown out due to the popularity of the scheme. He says that would save the budget $1.26 billion.

That’s not a huge amount in the grand scheme of things and doesn’t take into account the obvious benefit (and savings) of reducing the number of high-polluting vehicles on Australian roads.

So, there you go, the Liberals would make just over one billion dollars in spending cuts.

Anything else?

Surely, after going on and on and on about spending all week, Australia’s “alternative government” would have a whole page of bullet points on where they could make savings.

Nope. That was it. Just the one.

Well, we’ve got a couple of ideas.

If we’re talking about vehicles, how about closing the loopholes which enable people who buy big dumb utes to avoid paying luxury car tax?

They do so by claiming the utes are commercial vehicles, even though the closest most of these “commercial vehicles” go to being off road is if they have to negotiate a gravel driveway at the school drop-off. I swear the RAM I get stuck behind some days has never been within cooee of a bush track. And, maybe the owner once had a screwdriver in the back. If so, it didn’t mark the metallic paint one bit.

Paterson’s argument about cutting EV incentives is that the people who buy them can afford them.

Surely the same goes for big dumb utes, right?

Here’s another. How about taxpayers stop paying for the diesel used by multi-national mining companies? As we often point out, many of these companies pay very little tax or royalties already.

Between them, these changes would save the budget more than $10 billion dollars a year.

We may have done the research and crunched the numbers, but if the Liberals aren’t capable of coming up with any ideas or policies of their own, they can borrow ours.

You’re welcome, Senator.

ACT Treasurer Chris Steel will today deliver his mid-year budget review to the territory’s Legislative Assembly.

He’s doing the local media rounds this morning, trumpeting a significant reduction in the deficit and spruiking a return to surplus within the forward estimates.

The ACT government posted a record defecit of $1.1 billion in 2024/25.

The Treasurer will this afternoon reveal that the deficit has fallen to just under $500 million.

That’s a significant cut but still a hefty deficit for a small jurisdiction.

While Mr Steel claims public service cuts, like the unofficial hiring freeze, has led the turnaround, a bigger factor is a couple of deals with the federal government, not least the new hospital funding deal announced last week.

The federal government has committed an extra $557 million to ACT hospitals as part of the next five-year funding arrangement, which will deliver $4.1 billion to the capital overall.

Foreign Minister Penny Wong is holding a press conference with her German counterpart, Dr Johann Wadephul.

He’s in town for talks under the banner of the Enhanced Strategic Partnership between Australia and Germany.

This has taken on extra significance in recent years, with Australia the largest non-NATO contributor to the defence of Ukraine.

As part of any visit like this, the ministers hold a joint press conference in the Blue Room of Parliament House.

These are more tightly managed than most pressers, with Australian and foreign journalists taking turns to ask just a handful of questions.

First, both are asked about the Herzog visit.

This may not surprise you but German politicians, even translated from their native tongue, sound just like Australian politicians!

Johann Wadephul, German Foreign Minister:

Germany has historical reasons for having a particular responsibility for existence and security of Israel. We feel a lasting commitment for this. But, apart from that, it is clear individual decisions by any Israeli government. This, however, must never lead to a questioning of our special relationship with Israel, and it must not lead to us giving calls for antisemitism anywhere in the world. There is a large and consistent responsibility for Germany that we feel beholden to and, of course, we also feel beholden to international law, including all decisions taken by all courts of law, which we accept. We accept the division of powers and we always feel bound to jurisdiction and we also call it out in the world.

Thanks Amy. Morning everyone.

There are a few ways you could look at Ed Husic’s comments on the impending visit to Australia of Israel President Isaac Herzog.

Regardless of what you make of the visit, should backbenchers have the right to comment publicly on issues like this?

Should these debates among Labor MP’s – if they’re allowed to happen at all – be held behind closed doors?

The main sticking point for the revival of the coalition is the Liberals’ insistence (and Nationals’ apparent resistance to) “shadow cabinet solidarity” or shutting the hell up if you disagree with anything.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and others within his leadership group repeatedly say that unity and discipline are the keys to the government’s electoral success (past and future).

Sure, having backbenchers shoot their mouths off – Trump style – on every issue, every day would be unhelpful.

But if an experienced former minister speaks from his heart and -more importantly – for voters in his electorate, how can that be  a bad thing? Isn’t that, kind of, what our system of government is all about?

And is he doing any damage to the government?

I haven’t seen a string of headlines screaming about a split in Labor ranks over the Herzog visit (even though there is) just because Husic has spoken up (again).

Perhaps that’s because the Murdoch press is still obsessing over the irrelevant leadership rumblings within the coalition. I guess that’s what those within the echo chamber are more interested in.

If people aren’t allowed to take to the streets to voice their concerns over the visit of a man who signed bombs which were dropped on children, then someone has to.

As happens so often in Australia’s political debate, only independents are allowed to talk sense, as we’ve seen from Sophie Scamps, Zali Steggall and Andrew Wilkie on the Herzog visit in the past hour.

Glenn Connley will take you through the next little bit while I deal with an unavoidable appointment.

Be good.

Or not. I’m not the boss of you.

Country Australians are famous for being laconic. But this can be a problem when it comes to seeking help for mental health support. And even when people do speak it, too often there is no one there to hear them.

One study published in 2025 found that, on average, Australians are waiting two and a half months to see a mental health specialist after a GP referral. Some Australians are waiting eight and a half months.

That means people actively seeking help are left stranded without the chance to speak with a mental health professional.

When mental health care is delayed, manageable conditions deteriorate into crises. People die or get pushed into hospital emergency departments, which are poorly suited to providing ongoing mental health care.

The consequences are most severe outside the major cities.

Australian Institute research shows that regional and remote communities experience disproportionately higher rates of suicide. This is because mental health services are scarce, travel distances are long, and wait times are even longer.

The average wait time for in-person mental health services in the bush is three months. Even for telehealth services, the average wait times are still two months.

Unless wait times for mental health services are improved, Australians – particularly those in regional and remote areas – will continue to die due to a lack of timely mental health support.

The international liquefied natural gas (LNG) industry conference is on in Qatar RIGHT NOW!!

It hasn’t made the Australian media as there seems to be no Aus politicians there, just a handful of Woodside and Santos executives.

That’s a shame because Qatar could really teach Australian politicians a thing or two about how to tax the gas industry. Qatar exports roughly the same amount of gas as Australia but gets 5 times more money than we do!

Time to end Australia’s great gas giveaway!

Good news for Adelaidites bereft at the cancellation of their beloved writers’ week: Constellations will occupy the space vacated by the Adelaide Writers’ Week cancellation.

The community organised festival will include a program of “Blak & Arab writers in conversation”, a day of children’s programming, a mini poetry festival (including J.M. Coetzee) and more. Dr Randa Abdel-Fattah will appear in conversation with former Writers’ Week director Louise Adler as part of a “guerilla” writers festival. 

In 2026, Australian literary festivals are under threat from the culture wars, climate risks, new hate speech laws and ongoing funding scarcity. The announcement of some Writing Australia programs, including a Writers’ Festival Author Travel Fund, are a modest move in the right direction. These festivals are crucial to our literary ecosystem. What does their future look like?

More here. 

Gee, if only there was some way to explain why these climate disasters are happening more often!

AAP reports Beach Energy has the sads about its latest profit report – after it only made $150m in profit for six months:

The nation’s third-largest oil and gas producer saw a big fall in first-half earnings after flooding in South Australia impacted production at its main field.

Beach Energy on Thursday posted a bottom-line net profit of $150 million, down 32 per cent on the previous corresponding period.

Its underlying result, which adjusts for one-off items, fell eight per cent to $219 million in the six months ended December.

Gas production dropped seven per cent after flooding last July in the Cooper Basin affected its wells and also left multiple communities cut off.

However, chief executive Brett Woods said the interim results were still solid.

“Onshore in the Cooper Basin, flood recovery efforts progressed strongly, with 97 per cent of affected production now back on line,” he said in a statement.

“With a solid first half performance, we are well placed to deliver on what will be an active second half of fiscal 2026 across our core east and west coast hubs.

“We are executing on our vision of becoming Australia’s leading domestic energy company.”

The Adelaide-based Beach Energy, which is 30 per cent owned by the Stokes family-controlled company SGH, produces domestic gas for eastern and western Australia and New Zealand.

It also supplies LNG, crude oil to local refineries and other energy-related products.

Beach Energy declared an interim dividend of one cent per share, down from three cents in 2025.

Overnight US Vice President J.D. Vance has called for a new trading bloc for critical minerals. He brought together representatives from the European Union and 54 nations to discuss the idea.

Trading blocs require trust between nations. What country would trust the US under Trump to keep their word on trade? Ask Canada and Mexico what their trade deal with the US was worth.

Any deal wouldn’t be worth the paper it was printed on. The first time something upset Trump, or he simply got bored, he is likely to start threatening tariffs.

If we sign up to any deal we should go in with our eyes wide open. We shouldn’t just assume that the US will be a reliable trade partner.

What about Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’ which includes the man accused of leading the genocide in Gaza, Israeli president, Benjamin Netanyahu? Is Australia joining that?

The answer is probably no, but it doesn’t seem we are brave enough to say it, judging from this response.

Penny Wong:

The Board of Peace proposal would involve Australia being part of a treaty. Obviously, that is a different kind of arrangement to those which we would generally engage in for these sorts of matters. We are obviously considering it but I would say we continue to work closely with the United States, particularly in the context of the Quad, and also AUKUS, in our shared interests.

ABC radio RN Breakfast host: New Zealand has been able to make a decision. Are we far off making a decision ourselves?

Wong: 

Look I think, you know, we are working through this and seeking to understand more closely what the US is seeking to do through the Board of Peace*. Obviously, one of the issues that we are interested in is the peace plan for Gaza. It is so important after what we have seen over the last two years that we work towards peace, and the objective that we’ve been really clear about, which is peace and security for both Palestinians and Israelis and two states.

*We know what they are seeking to do because they have released the glossy brochure of the resorts they want to build on the bodies of Palestinians killed by Israel’s attacks on a civilian population.

Does Wong support people who feel they have to protest this visit?

Host: Do you support the right of Australians who wish to protest against the visit of Israeli President Isaac Herzog to Australia – do you support their right to demonstrate?

You will not be surprised that the answer is, no not really, really prefer that didn’t happen.

Wong: 

Look, we are a country, a democracy, where we know people have differences of views, and I do understand very keenly that people have different views about this visit, and there is depth of feeling in different communities across Australia, you know, we see that, we feel that. What I would ask people to recall is the context and circumstances of this visit and the purpose of it, which is to honour the victims of the antisemitic terror attack, which we all know was so traumatic, and to provide support to the Australian Jewish community.

Host: Just finally, Labor backbencher, Ed Husic, says he’s very uncomfortable with the visit. When we’re talking about social cohesion, what’s your message to those who might be feeling the same; they may be feeling uncomfortable or angry about the visit of the Israeli President?

Wong: 

As I said, I really do understand the depth of feeling about this visit, the depth of feeling in the community about what we’ve seen in Gaza over the last two years, which is why we’ve been so clear about working with, pressing for peace with others in the international community, for civilians to be protected and for aid to flow. But this visit is about a mourning Jewish community, and I would ask Australians to recall that.

Penny Wong was asked on ABC radio RN Breakfast this morning about Australia’s legal obligations in regards to Israeli president Isaac Herzog’s coming visit, given he is facing allegations from the UN he incited genocide.

Wong says Australia has considered its legal obligations and invited him. Which is not saying ‘we don’t think we have to arrest him, actually’ but essentially is. Read through this exchange and see for yourself:

Host: Chris Sidoti, a current member of the UN Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory says that Israeli President, Isaac Herzog, should be arrested by the federal police for the crime of incitement to genocide when he arrives on his visit to Australia next week. Is Australia obliged to take such action under international law?

Wong:

Well Sally, President Herzog is coming to Australia to honour the victims of the worst antisemitic terror attack in our country’s history at Bondi. He’s coming to provide support to the Australian Jewish community. The community asked for President Herzog to visit, and he’s been invited by the Governor‑General at the request of the Prime Minister.

Host: Has the federal government taken any advice on the legal circumstances surrounding President Herzog?

Wong: 

We always consider legal advice in relation to our obligations. I’d make the point we have invited him.

Host: On the allegations of genocide before the International Court of Justice, Chris Sidoti had this to say.

AUDIO OF CHRIS SIDOTI, MEMBER OF THE UN COMMISSION OF INQUIRY ON THE OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY: 

It doesn’t take an actual genocide to occur for the incitement to occur. The incitement only needs to be the encouragement, the urging of genocide, whether or not anybody acts on it. So to that extent, any finding by the International Court of Justice in the genocide case is not relevant to the charge of incitement.  

Host: On legal terms, you’ve talked about what happened with Bondi and the protocol and the reasons for inviting President Herzog, but purely in a legal sense, why does the Australian Government think that it is not required to arrest or attempt to arrest President Herzog?

Wong:

A couple of points, Sally. I have said previously that Israel will be judged by the International Court of Justice on its compliance with the Genocide Convention, and I’ve also said previously that it must accept its responsibility for the humanitarian situation in Gaza. But let’s again go back to the context of this visit. We have the Australian Jewish community, who have been targeted in an overtly antisemitic terrorist attack, we have had 15 Australians die, we have families mourning, and this was a request from the Jewish community for President Herzog to visit. He is here to provide support to that community and to honour the victims of this horrific terror attack.

In what is becoming a daily event, current Nationals leader David Littleproud (who has the job until they can come up with someone else the Queenslanders will follow – and that’s not McCormack or Darren Chester) has stepped out of the Sky studio and straight into a doorstop in the press gallery hallway.

Same topics are covered:

Nationals belong to their own party and while they want to work with the Liberals they are not a faction of the Liberals.

Discussions are respectful and constructive

They can’t come up with how to reconcile this. Nationals will do what they think is best.

On Monday we got the annual “dump” of donation data from the Australian Electoral Commission. Here on The Point you can read the Australia Institute’s initial reaction: $880 million spent by political parties over three years, much of it funded by the taxpayer – but with no truth in political advertising protections.

Over in the Australian Financial Review, Ronald Mizen reports on “How Australia’s mining barons tried to sway the federal election” – with Coal Australia funding Australians for Prosperity (spokes Jason Falinski being a “moderate” Liberal who lost his seat to a community independent in 2022) and Gina Rinehart’s Hancock Prospectingdonating to right-wing lobby Advance. Clive Palmer’s Minerology donated $54 million to the unsuccessful Trumpet of Patriots.

I’m as interested in how the parties are spending their money as I am in how they are raising it. As murky as our political donation laws are, our political spending laws are even more opaque.

For example, we found out that radio shock jock Kyle Sandilands was paid by NSW Labor for election advice because it was leaked to the AFR long after the state election.

But one thing that stands out from the figures is how lean One Nation’s election campaign was last year compared to its right-wing competitors. The minor party spent $3.3 million in the 2024-25 financial years, compared to $19 million for the National Party and $193 million for the Liberal Party – while winning 6% of the vote to the Nationals’ 4% and the Liberal Party/Liberal Nationals’ 28%.

These numbers are not directly comparable, because the major parties have policy and membership related costs and contested state and territory elections that One Nation skipped. But it gives a sense of volume: the Liberal and National parties have tens of times more money than the party that is currently outpolling them.

Better polling results will help One Nation fundraise, so expect a more expensive campaign in 2028 than we saw last year. But there’s another potential windfall coming for One Nation – one that would allow it to outspend 2025 significantly. This post getting a little long, so I’ll explain more in a later live blog article.

With inflation driven by Christmas holidays and data centres for artificial intelligence, the RBA didn’t need to raise the interest rate this week, argues Matt Grudnoff.

On this episode of Follow the Money, Matt and Ebony Bennett to discuss big economic reform opportunities facing the government and why the Reserve Bank of Australia is so cautious about cutting rates, yet so quick to hike them up.

Independent MPs Andrew Wilkie, Sophie Scamps and Zali Steggall are coming together to highlight what they call “the inappropriateness of Israel’s president Isaac Herzog’s visit to Australia, and the risk it poses to social cohesion”.

Other than Labor’s Ed Husic, and the Greens, they are among the only MPs to push back against the visit, given the allegations Herzog faces of inciting genocide and his actions, which included signing bombs which were fired at Gaza – where Israel itself has been forced to accept at least 70,000 civilians have been killed during its campaign (the real figure would be much higher and continues to grow every day).

Wilkie says:

It is unacceptable that Australia should host the head of state for a country which the International Court of Justice has found is committing the crime of apartheid, and which the United Nations Independent Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory found was committing genocide.

In January, the Government hastily legislated to stamp down on hate speech in Australia, and here we are in February inviting someone to Australia who has made public statements which have been cited as evidence of genocidal intent. 

Moreover this visit is divisive and in no way conducive to social cohesion. Indeed, it is clearly inflaming the situation. It is highly inappropriate to have invited President Isaac Herzog, inappropriate to provide him with a visa and inappropriate to host him at Parliament house. It shows disrespect for international law.”

Scamps:

Inviting a foreign head of state who was found to have incited the commission of genocide is deeply distressing for many Australians, and risks igniting further division at the very time when Australian leaders should be doing everything they can to rebuild social cohesion and bring our nation together.

It’s entirely inconsistent that at the same time the Government was rushing through laws to crack down on hate speech, they were also extending an invitation to an Israeli official found by the UN Commission of Inquiry to have made statements that ‘contain dehumanizing sentiments that encourage hatred toward Palestinians and violence against Palestinians’.

Many Australians are utterly bewildered by this invitation, and it’s left them rightly questioning this country’s commitment to rules-based world order, human rights and international law.”

Steggall:

I stand in deep solidarity with Jewish Australians and our broader community in the wake of the Bondi attack. However, I am deeply troubled by the proposed visit by President Herzog.

Australia is a multi-faith, multicultural society and our social cohesion has been considerably tested in recent years. Official visits by foreign leaders can cause significant damage to our fragile social harmony.“I appreciate that many in the Jewish community support President Herzog’s visit to Australia in the wake of the shocking Bondi terror attacks. However, in the broader interests of community cohesion, President Herzog’s presence is likely to be deeply divisive and will cause further harm to national unity.“If President Herzog’s visit is to proceed, it would be an opportunity to outline his commitment to a path for peace, and a situation in which both Israelis and Palestinians can co-exist and live safely.” 

Greens senator Barbara Pocock is none too pleased with the government’s response to the consultancy inquiries which have been held over the last couple of years – and are only now receiving a response.

From the statement:

The two parliamentary inquiries made 52 recommendations between them, which were agreed to by Labor, the Liberals and the Greens, which gave the government an opening for reform across the accounting and consulting sector. 

The reports made clear recommendations, including lowering partnership caps, separating audit from non-audit services, improving whistleblower protections and not allowing PwC to tender for government work until all ongoing investigations have concluded.

But the government is going for voluntary adherence rather than legislation of the stronger recommendations.

Pocock said that was a joke:

The government’s response to this consultancy crisis is woefully inadequate. We discovered a tidal wave of malpractice, poor governance and structural failures. The government’s response fobs off our report with baby steps that don’t meet the scale of this crisis.

So much of the Parliament’s time and resources have been spent uncovering unethical behaviour in the consultancy sector. The government was provided with clear recommendations for cleaning up the sector but instead of agreeing to them, Labor continues to greenlight unethical contractors. 

This is a government of gestures. Despite the extensive evidence and comprehensive recommendations, the government is once again choosing to tinker around the edges, instead of committing to actual reform.

Political donations data released this week shows that big consulting firms are still giving large donations to the government. It’s a straightforward conflict of interest – it’s no wonder Labor is failing to act. Three of the Big 4 consultancy firms continue to donate to the government – this is just wrong and the government is refusing to take action on this.

The government continues to distance itself from a myriad of consultancy scandals, which won’t go away. The fact that the government let PwC back into the fold before the TPB, AFP and NACC investigations had concluded is both baffling and pathetic. Astonishingly they’ve refused to comment on PwC continuing to hide crucial information from the Senate. 

The government’s refusal to clean up the unethical practices rife across the consultancy sector is the reason why the Greens introduced a bill to parliament. We must close the legal loopholes that allow government contractors who behave unethically to get away with it.”

In her time away from the senate (this is forced time away, as opposed to her usual, just missing parliament because she gets a better offer, like staying at Mar-a-Lago, owned by the main character in the Epstein files.

She told Sky last night (evergreen statement) Pauline Hanson said she was willing to lead with the Liberals and Nationals to form government.

“Of course, that is the only way to move forward” she said.

But not now because they are too much of a rabble, she added. Although even that in itself is interesting, because while One Nation is taking votes off Labor, she is mostly hoovering up the Coalition votes – particularly those in Nationals’ electorates, which means that the Liberals and Nationals would have even less seats and she would still fall short.

But what do any of these pesky facts matter.

On the final day of this week’s sitting, Pauline Hanson has returned to the senate (she’s been in South Australia escorting Cory Bernardi around after a seven day ban for her latest burqa stunt) and has taken a bow as she entered the chamber asking “did you miss me?”

She was suspended as she refused to apologise for her stunt.

The sitting will start at 9am and the first order of business today is:

No. 1 —        National Commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People Bill 2026 — Ms Plibersek (Minister for Social Services) to present a bill.  First reading.  Second reading to be moved.

For those who don’t feel they get quite enough parliament, you can find the House program here and the senate list, here.

Just so you know, Australia is a big part of this. As AAP reports:

US Vice President JD Vance has unveiled plans to marshal allies into a preferential trade bloc for critical minerals as ‍Washington escalates efforts to loosen China’s grip on materials crucial to advanced manufacturing. 

China has wielded its chokehold on the processing of many minerals as geo-economic leverage, at times curbing exports, suppressing prices and undercutting other countries’ ability to diversify sources of the materials used ​to make semiconductors, electric vehicles and advanced weapons.

“We want to eliminate that problem of people flooding into our markets with cheap critical minerals to undercut our domestic manufacturers,” Vance told a gathering of visiting ministers in Washington without mentioning China.

“We will establish reference prices for ⁠critical minerals at each stage of production … and for members of the preferential zone, these reference prices will operate as a floor maintained through adjustable tariffs to uphold pricing integrity,” Vance said.

President Donald Trump’s administration has stepped up efforts to secure US supplies of critical minerals after China rattled senior officials and global markets in 2025 by withholding rare earths required by American automakers and other industrial manufacturers. 

Trump on Monday launched a US strategic stockpile of critical minerals, called Project Vault, backed by $US10 billion ($A14 billion) in seed funding from the US Export-Import Bank and $US2 billion ($A2.9 billion) in private funding.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said 55 countries attended the talks in Washington, among them South Korea, India, Thailand, Japan, Germany, Australia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, all with ‌varying refining or mining capabilities.

The ​minerals are “heavily concentrated in the hands of one country,” Rubio said, without referencing China, adding that the situation had become a “tool of leverage in geopolitics”. 

At the meeting on Wednesday, local time, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer announced a bilateral ‍plan with Mexico and a trilateral agreement with the European Union and Japan to strengthen critical mineral supply chains and set the stage for a broader agreement with other allies.

The plans aim to explore specific measures such as price supports, market standards, subsidies, and guaranteed purchases to encourage production.

The US, EU, and Japan also said they would pursue other avenues, including discussions within the Group of 7 and the Minerals Security Partnership.

A multi-country effort to establish price floors of critical minerals is the Trump administration’s latest move to exert control over private business. 

The White House has taken stakes in several mineral companies as well as chipmaker Intel and has negotiated deals with drugmakers for lower prices.

By guaranteeing minimum prices through ‌co-ordinated trade rules, Washington hopes to unlock private investment in mining and processing projects that have struggled to compete with cheaper Chinese supply. 

The approach could reshape global ​supply chains for materials essential to electric vehicles, semiconductors and defense systems, while raising costs for manufacturers in the short term and escalating trade tensions with Beijing.

“China has long played an important and constructive role in keeping the global industrial ‍and supply chains of critical minerals safe and stable and is willing to continue to make active efforts in this regard,” China’s embassy in Washington told Reuters when asked about the meeting.

Australia is constantly told there is not a lot we can do to change the world – but you never have to go back far to see how untrue that is.

Albanese, in his speech this morning, showed how untrue the helpful helplessness attitude really is:

Indeed, the reason the UN Charter makes specific mention of sexual discrimination is because of a great Australian, Jessie Street.
 
One of just eight women among 850 delegates in San Francisco in 1945.
 
She told that conference:
 
“Where the rules are silent, women are not usually considered.”
 
This year’s call to “Balance the Scales” reminds us that there are still nations around the world where discrimination against women is written into the law.
 
That was Australia, back when married women were excluded from working in the public service.
 
When only widows were eligible for the single parent payment.
 
When there was no such thing as no-fault divorce, or the Family Court. 
 
Those barriers didn’t fall over on their own.
 
Australian women organised and campaigned to bring them down.
 
Generations of women have made the personal, political – and delivered political change as a result.
 
Yet the wisdom of Jessie Street still holds true, for all of us.
 
Because it is not enough for the rules to be silent.
 
It is not enough to assume that the playing field is level and opportunity is equal, just because there is nothing in writing that says otherwise.
 
It is easy to talk about equality for women in principle.
 
What matters is advancing equality for women in practice.
 

Anthony Albanese has done the annual leaders address to the UN Womens’ Breakfast at parliament house (ahead of international womens’ day).

So far this year, according to Sherele Moody’s Red Heart Movement tracker, 6 women and three children have already lost their lives in Australia, to violence.

On why One Nation is soaring in the polls, McManus says:

I think there is – wherever you got a gap between people’s expectations of how life should be and how it actually it is, so your parents, what they had and then what you see has not been as good. Well, people start looking for answers. 

You know, some people will fill that with things that aren’t true and want to blame people that aren’t to blame for these problems. The why we got housing problems is because of the tax issue and because of the supply, not because of immigrants. And so some people will use the – to blame others for it and that that is part of the reason why, you know, that’s been fuelled in terms of minor parties. But governments still in the end have take action to make the country fairer

Sally McManus said it’s time for the change to CGT to be made to help rebalance the housing market:

I think the Government understands that there’s a deep unfairness, deep unfairness where if you work fulltime that is not getting you to a position where you can ever buy a house. Now, when John Howard brought in capital gains tax [discount] 26 years ago, the average wage of a worker, it would be six times more, like, to buy a house. Now, it’s nearly twice that. It’s 11. So that means that, like, the compact we had or what people could expect in life is that if you work hard, you’ll be able toe afford your housing, your rent, and to be able to buy a house eventually isn’t there. And that it’s 1%, like, 1% of the wealthiest Australians, the ones benefiting from this. I think, like, it as not just us. It’s like across the community, like, people like Allegra Spender, everyone, saying that this needs to change and, like, clearly it does. I do think the Government is listening to that and we’re going to just keep pushing because it’s the right thing to do.

And what about what business would say about needing productivity gains?

McManus:

Every time business says that, they are deflecting. Basically, they are the ones that are responsible for productivity increases and they have not been investing in training up workers so skilling up workers, or new equipment and capital which are the things that lead to productivity increases.

They have underinvested in that for a long period of time. And they have basically put short-term profits ahead of doing that.

That’s the reason why we got a productivity problem.

They love to turn around and say, “It’s workers’ problem, we should work harder”, we’re working extremely hard and we are productive. The thing that has changed is them not investing in the things that actually make a difference.

Why are workers more intent on striking now than at other times?

Sally McManus:

Because people’s pressures in terms of cost of living especially around housing, which makes up such a huge amount of your budget is, you know, it each been eaten up by housing costs. People are really in a situation where their only option is to get ahead is wages – is wage increases. Now, if you’re very wealthy, you have got a whole lot of tax breaks that add to your wealth and allow you ahead, not through working hard, but through using those tax breaks.

If you’re a worker, your way of getting ahead is wages and so I’m seeing that young people are saying, “We have had enough of this”, and that really pushing for better deal at work because it’s their way of getting ahead.

The ACTU have a few things they are prioritising as campaigns this year – and a cut to the CGT discount is pretty high up on that list, given how the tax discount has impacted the housing market.

Sally McManus was asked about that this morning on the ABC and said:

Landlords keep putting up rents and inflation there or how much they’re going up is 4% and so your average worker is either a renter or they’re a first home buyer and they’re the ones under the most amount of cost-of-living pressure for a whole lot of reasons, but the rent is a big part of it and takes up most of your wages. In order just to keep up, you need a 4% pay increase. So that’s, you know, people are going to want to get ahead.

That means more than 4% now. Lots of employers are reasonable, but some aren’t and workers are getting together with collective agreements and they are delivering wage increases that are ahead of inflation, but, of course, if employers aren’t reasonable, that’s what workers need to do, you know, there will be strikes.

Defence minister Richard Marles is doing the media rounds this morning to talk about the defence land and site sale which has been two years in the making (it is now reaching its next stage).

But it’s always interesting when Marles is asked something outside of the portfolio he is so slavishly devoted to – as he was on ABC TV News Breakfast just a moment ago. (Interesting = watch him muddle it up)

Q: We know the Government is looking at ways to address the housing shortage. Capital gains tax – can you confirm the Government is looking at potential changes to the discount?

Marles:

You know, what I can say is that our changed and the tax arrangements around our housing policies haven’t changed. We do acknowledge that there is intergenerational challenges in respect of housing, but our strategy in respect of that has been very much focused on the supply side. It has been focused on building more houses and that’s been the case for the last couple of years. That continues to be the case in terms of our strategy forward. So that is where our focus is.

Q: But can you rule it out then? Capital gains tax is off the table?

Marles:

Well, I mean, what I said and what I’ll continue to say and what other ministers have said when asked this question is that in respect of housing policy, our position is clear and there haven’t been changes to that including in the tax arrangements, and our strategy in terms of dealing with the intergenerational challenges, our strategy in terms of dealing with housing affordability is very much on the supply side and seeing more houses built. That will continue to be the case.

Cool, cool, cool – very clear. Snaps all round.

For those confused – like Marles – yes, the government is looking at it.

Australia’s “booming” relationship with Indonesia will take another step forward when the nations’ leaders pen a security agreement.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese will travel to the southeast Asian nation on Thursday and meet with Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto to formally sign the deal they negotiated and announced in November.

While the parties have been somewhat coy about what the pact specifically entails, Australian Strategic Policy Institute senior analyst Gatra Priyandita said the “umbrella arrangement” would likely codify existing deals to find common strategic vision.

Dr Priyandita added Australia’s PukPuk Treaty signed with Papua New Guinea in October that ensures mutual defence between the nations prompted some suspicion in Indonesia, which would likely be nullified by the new deal.

“Indonesia just seeks clarification, and now both Indonesia and PNG have security treaty level status,” he told AAP.

“It’s an attempt to reassure Indonesia that you’re just as important to us as PNG is, and having more codified engagements also means there are more opportunities to express concerns and policy preferences and so on.”

Australia-Indonesia Centre industry fellow and author Jemma Purdey said the treaty indicated any concerns Indonesia held about the AUKUS arrangement were in the past.

President Prabowo has faced criticism at home for appearing to abandon the nation’s long-held foreign policy of non-alignment.

“There is criticism at home that he is getting too close to the US, in an effort to extract some concession on tariffs,” Dr Purdey told AAP.

“But the fact is that under Prabowo, Indonesia has also done deals to buy defence equipment from Russia – there are lots of indications that he does not discriminate.”

Outside of defence, Dr Purdey said Mr Albanese would use the trip to improve trade relations and help ease access for Australian businesses seeking opportunities in Indonesia.

Dr Priyandita said the relationship could only be viewed as being in a great place.

“Defence and security ties are at their peak, economic ties continue to improve, trade ties are booming, investment ties are booming,” he said.

Mr Albanese, whose first overseas trip after his re-election in 2025 was to Indonesia, told his caucus this week Australia would continue strengthening international ties.

“I’ll be in Indonesia to sign the treaty that we agreed with President Prabowo at the end of last year, again making sure that in this region and in the world that we’re engaged in a way that protects our national interest,” he said.

Politicians have been accused of being the primary drivers of racism while sweeping reform recommendations to address prejudice gather dust.

As Australia grapples with rising anti-immigrant sentiment and the fallout from a deadly terror attack on a Hanukkah event at Bondi Beach, the nation’s leaders have leaned on terms like “social cohesion” in a bid for unity.

But far from alleviating tensions, community groups and Australia’s race discrimination commissioner have pointed the finger back at politicians for making the situation worse.

“It is often politicians themselves who have been the primary drivers of division,” Australian National Imams Council President Shadi Alsuleiman told AAP.

In the lead-up to the federal election, MPs from all sides of the political spectrum were “dehumanising migrants and using inflammatory rhetoric that could lead to racism as a tool for garnering votes,” commissioner Giridharan Sivaraman said.

The federal government has been searching for ways to stymie hate, recently passing controversial laws that experts say could scupper political criticism and free speech.

But the solution has been in front of them the whole time, Mr Sivaraman said.

The Australian Human Rights Commission in November 2024 presented the government with a comprehensive plan to tackle all forms of racism, including anti-Semitism, through the National Anti-Racism Framework.

More than 54 organisations including the Federation of Ethnic Communities Councils of Australia, the Refugee Council of Australia and the Australian Council of Social Service have called for it to be funded and followed.

Though the government received the report more than 430 days ago, Attorney-General Michelle Rowland’s office says it is “carefully considering” the 63 recommendations.

A date for when it will formally respond is unknown.

“The government is taking a multifaceted approach to combating the scourge of racism, with action underway across a range of portfolios,” a spokesperson for the attorney-general said.

This inaction has been frustrating for the race discrimination commissioner.

“Not taking action against racism means harm continues to be suffered across our society … racism can lead to death in a variety of ways,” Mr Sivaraman told AAP.

“There are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders who are dying from diseases eradicated in the rest of the population 30 years ago … there’s over-representation of communities impacted by racism in our justice system, and deaths in custody continue.”

He said Australians would benefit from a better society if politicians were courageous, honest and transparent about racism.

Greens senator Mehreen Faruqi, who supports the framework, has said the major parties hide behind terms like “social cohesion” to whitewash issues regarding racism.

“This is not only a distraction but it is dangerous, as it allows hate to fester,” she told AAP.

“Instead of a ridiculous system of envoys, the government should create a standalone anti-racism portfolio and a minister responsible for it.”

The framework proposes reforms across legal, justice, health, education, workplaces, media and arts and data collection.

Husic continued:

A month later, one year after Christchurch, he appeared before Senate estimates, and what happened was instructive.

He was grilled by coalition government senators who were not asking about what ASIO was doing about the threat but, rather, objecting to the label of ‘right-wing extremist’. Let me quote then coalition senator Connie Fierravanti-Wells to Mr Burgess at Senate estimates. She said:

“‘Right’ is associated with conservatism in this country, and there are many people of conservative background who take exception to being tarred with the same brush”.

She went on to tell the director-general:

“So I think the time has come, Director-General, especially from you, to ensure that you are very careful with the terminology that you use …”

Labels sting, huh? Do we think we should be a bit more careful about how we throw labels around, or should we just ‘face uncomfortable truths’?

What happened after this was also instructive because, 12 months after that exchange, under a coalition government, ASIO determined it would no longer refer to right-wing extremism or Islamist terrorism. From that time forth, the terms ‘religiously motivated’ or ‘ideologically motivated’ terrorism would be used. That was under a coalition government, a move overseen by then minister for home affairs Peter Dutton, and former ministers of that government are now telling us to confront uncomfortable truths—members like the member for Canning, who previously declared it was ‘time for the Australian Muslim leadership to systematically and clearly make the case that Islam is a religion of peace’.

So let’s be clear then: when some coalition MPs advise us to face uncomfortable truths, are the only truths we confront the ones conservatives find comfortable to confront?

Not to be outdone, we had but last week coalition senator Andrew Bragg mused;… the Australian Muslim community has to take some responsibility for the behaviours we’ve seen exhibited over the last couple of decades.

He opined:

“The West has probably been too nice for its own good …

Perhaps he should have a chat about whether a Victorian imam and his wife thought it was nice that they were run off the road in Melbourne and attacked and had racist abuse and rubbish hurled at them. Or is it nice for Muslim Australian women to have their hijab torn off or be labelled, with an expletive, ‘terrorists’ or be spat at? Is it nice to see pigs’ heads in Muslim sections of cemeteries or impaled on the fences of places of worship? Maybe we should refer to any of the work undertaken by Action Against Islamophobia or the Islamophobia Register that tracks examples of what ‘nice’ looks like to many Muslim Australians on a near daily basis. Antisemitism, Islamophobia, racism across the board—all these behaviours should not be tolerated, full stop.

We should be appalled by all of these acts, not selectively concerned or occasionally responsive. Let me go to words expressed in this parliament to underscore that point.

In April 2019, then prime minister Scott Morrison said: “We must strive to see the ‘us’ in our national life and to celebrate it, an Australian ‘us’ of different faiths, of different ethnicities, of different ages, genders and sexualities, an Australian ‘us’ that rejects the hate, the blame and contempt that grip too much of modern debate”.

Those words are those I can stand by.

Disappointingly, those words are a far cry from the Scott Morrison of today, who wants to have practitioners of just one faith be singled out for registration and accreditation and for them to somehow prove their fidelity to our nation because the starting-point assumption is, ‘Until you do this, you might be suspect, deficient, not to be trusted.’

So much for the 2019 call for an Australian us that rejects the ‘blame and contempt’. What’s the end game here?

Once imams are accredited and their loyalty proven, do we get them to wear armbands? Are we more relaxed with that—replicating a more abominable chapter of world history? Once we start down the path of uncomfortable truths, we need to know exactly where we’re headed.

It’s worth noting that not one Australian was required to prove their fidelity to the nation post Christchurch, when a white supremacist Australian slaughtered 51 New Zealanders. No practitioner of the Christian faith was asked to do likewise after the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.

And here’s the thing: nor should they. It’s a ridiculous and divisive notion, because we do not sheet home blame and responsibility to entire communities for the acts of extremist individuals.

Surely we can agree. Surely we can rally around that compelling logic, because dividing people and shoving them into dark corners to nurse fear and grievance is not the way we build and sustain a strong nation.

This is the crux of my call to parliament. In a time of fear and grief and anger, we all as parliamentarians have a critical role to play. Scapegoating, wielding a broad brush to tar—that stuff’s easy to do. That’s the political equivalent of instant gratification—Red Bull politicking: quick hit then a slump. I come back to the words delivered by a rabbi to me post Bondi: ‘We choose our hard.’

Jacinda Ardern chose her hard and showed the world how to build a better, cohesive, stronger nation in the aftermath of unimaginable grief.

That’s the task before us all—the hard and patient and vital work to bring people together at a time when Australians want and deserve calm, determined leadership from us all.

While Ed Husic is back in the news again for publicly admitting to being uncomfortable with Israeli president Isaac Hertzog’s visit to Australia next week (something he is not alone in within the Labor caucus, but don’t expect too many within the backbench group to publicly stand up on) he also gave a speech in the Federation chamber (the house of reps spill over chamber) where he laid out much of the unchecked Islamphobia and selective calls for facing ‘hard truths’.

I’ll include the speech in its entirety so you can read all of Husic’s words in their entirety:

There’s rightly been a lot of focus in this parliament on the events of 14 December, and there should continue to be. We witnessed 15 of our fellow Australians killed—Jewish Australians targeted because of their faith—a depravity carried out by ISIS inspired terrorists.

Their act has written an incredibly dark chapter into our nation’s history. The grieving will continue for some time, and, while this occurs, we have another task to pursue. We need to have a clear understanding of how this occurred.

What are the lessons we can learn to avoid a repeat of this on Australian soil? This is why I never hesitated in expressing my belief— supporting the member for Macarthur—that a royal commission into this awful, horrific event be undertaken.

Besides getting answers and clarity, it can also play an important role in healing and bringing us together. The growth of extremism needs to be confronted regardless of what corner it emerges from.

I’ve been concerned about this for sometime, but it crystallised further in 2019—the year an Australian white supremacist travelled to Christchurch, New Zealand, and killed 51 people on the basis of their religion. That terrorist’s acts against people of the Islamic faith was livestreamed over social media. His 74-page manifesto was later used to inspire attacks on a synagogue in Poway, California; a supermarket in El Paso, Texas; a mosque in Baerum, Norway; and another synagogue in Halle, Germany. This was a hateful cancer that spread.

When I recently stood on that footbridge at Bondi and looked at the park where Jewish Australians had been celebrating Hanukkah and were targeted for attack, I felt the exact chill I experienced visiting those two mosques in Christchurch. In both cases innocent people were hemmed in, and, with little room for them to escape, tragedy ensued.

Again, I supported a royal commission into the events of Bondi because, as I have said before and restate now, whether it’s an Islamist or a far-right extremist, anyone that poses a threat to the safety of our fellow Australians must be dealt with head-on using every resource we can muster. We must stand up to terrorism, but tough should join with calm—resisting threats while unifying.

Post Christchurch, then New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern was praised for doing whatever she could to comfort and rally New Zealanders. At a time of grief and mourning, she consoled while also being prepared to respond strongly to terror, including setting up a royal commission into the horrors of Christchurch. Notably, she did not beam herself in via Australian media to blame our nation for the terror that occurred on New Zealand soil.

Prime Minister Ardern worked with then prime minister Morrison to set in place laws to prevent social media giants from live-streaming terrorist acts. The response to Christchurch is a salutary example of how societies traumatised by terror can and should rally, comfort and unite.

But, since the terrible events of Bondi, I’ve often reflected on the contrast between 2025 and 2019. I think it’s important we reflect and contrast because, during the last parliamentary sitting, we heard a number of times from the coalition of the need to confront hard truths. In fact, the opposition leader made it a feature of her condolence motion, stating:

‘To do so, we must face uncomfortable truths. Radical Islamist extremism caused this. I repeat: radical Islamist extremism caused this.’

After that, during condolence contributions and debates and via questions on notice, parliamentarians referred to ‘radical Islamists’, ‘radical Islamist extremism’, ‘radical Islamist extremists’, ‘radical Islamist ideology’ and even ‘radical Islam’ nearly 90 times. They didn’t even blink associating ‘radicalism’ with an entire faith. Let’s reflect and contrast. Let’s, as the opposition leader invites us to do, ‘face uncomfortable truths’.

One person that has to do this on a daily basis is the person who heads ASIO, Mike Burgess. In February 2020, nearly a year after Christchurch, Mr Burgess highlighted the growth of right-wing extremism and the threat it poses to Australia. He warned how small cells of right-wing extremists were meeting across the country and saluting Nazi flags in homes nestled in our suburbs, where they hid weapons caches and trained in combat.

(Continued in next post)

Given all the commentary around the economy and the idea that spending money on workers and services is bad, but businesses making increasing profits is fine when it comes to inflation, the Greens are once again trying to draw attention to ‘corporate price gouging’.

Nick McKim said the Greens bill would be debated in the senate later today:

Price gouging is a major driver of inflation, and Australians are copping it every day

When big corporations with market power jack up prices simply because they can, that feeds inflation right through the economy.

Supermarkets are a clear example, but this problem goes far beyond the checkout. Price gouging is happening across the economy, and it’s keeping inflation higher for longer.

The bill would make rising prices just because you can illegal, and give the ACCC powers to investigate and if necessary prosecute companies accused of using their market power to raise prices.

You don’t need to be a savant though, to see where this will go today – Labor won’t support it, and neither will enough in the non-government benches for it to move any further.

You can read some more about the impacts of price gouging on Australians, here.

As always, Niki Savva is well worth reading today.

She has written on the future (such as it is) of the Liberal party – and as always, has the inside track.

Senior Liberals – except Sussan Ley’s numbers man, Alex Hawke – agree she is toast.

If Angus Taylor has the numbers next week, likely boosted by another devastating poll, he will use them. If not, he aims to strike before the budget in May. Like many others, Taylor is in no rush to reform the Coalition. He wants freedom to zero in on the economy – the one issue that can unify the party – without worrying what the Nationals might do.

The right, and certain moderates, hope Taylor can do better than Ley. They stop short of predicting he will succeed. One senior conservative put it this way:“Taylor will be our next opposition leader, but Hastie could be our next prime minister.”

Then there is the election review, which as Savva points out she hasn’t seen but is told mirrors the findings in her book, Earthquake – which I would believe. Savva has the inside track there, and goes back to 2022 when the party refused to examine what had happened to it, pulled along by Peter Dutton who was convinced the force of his personality alone would get the Liberals where they wanted to go.

And the rest, as they say, is history.

Hello and welcome to parliament Friday, which is the last day of the sitting week. The MPs will be rushing for the airport by the end of the day, but there is still a mess to sort out.

First up – the Liberal and National party. Will they or won’t they. Is there a rose ceremony? Does it even matter? Would a reality TV version of whatever it is they are doing offer more for the country? Probably.

Secondly, Labor isn’t getting away clean from internal discomfort either. Former minister Ed Husic came out yesterday and admitted he was “very uncomfortable” with the impending visit from Israeli president Isaac Herzog.

I find it hard to reconcile the images I have seen of him signing bombs that were then dropped on Palestinian homes and the fact that the ICJ has called out some of his statements as indicating collective responsibility of Palestinians,” Mr Husic said.

I am concerned that a figure like that does not necessarily enhance social cohesion.”

Husic is not alone in feeling that way within the Labor caucus, but he is one of the only ones brave enough to cross what has been termed by some Labor insiders as the “red line” within the party’s senior leadership with regards to the visit.

Herzog is Israel’s version of Sam Mostyn – president in Israel’s system is mostly a ceremonial role – but he has faced claims following a UN investigation that he “incited the commission of genocide” with some of his comments. He’s denied it, but his visit to Australia (along with the extension of the NSW protest ban to cover his visit) has raised concerns about how it will help ‘social cohesion’ given some of his actions.

Expect more of that to play out today.

You have me, Amy Remeikis with you and I am three coffees deep already. Mike Bowers will be around (yay) and you’ll have a range of expert contributors to ask questions of and fill in some gaps.

So, for the last time this week (before we go into just the house sitting and estimates next week) let’s get into it.