Australia Institute Live: First question time of the year gets underway

And on that note, we will close off today’s Australia Institute Live blog and go and rest some tired brains so we are ready for you bright and early tomorrow.

Thank you for checking in on this first ever blog – it is a bit of an experiment, but we hope it adds some value amongst all the Auspol noise. There are a lot of news blogs and the aim isn’t to compete with those – they play a very important role and let’s face it, we don’t have the resources to do that. But what we do hope to do is add in some context where needed and do as many fact checks as possible at the time the fact needs to be checked. And well, you have a bit more freedom to call some of that stuff out at a think tank.

So thank you to those who joined us in our soft launch – we have taken your feedback on board and are working through some of the bugs. But I just wanted to say a special thank you to web development manager Andrij Stachurski who built this thing entirely from scratch and took on board my increasingly frantic requests. There is always a big team of people who go unsung in the creation and roll out of these things, and while my name may be on the front, I am merely the typing monkey. It’s all those others who keep it ticking over and I thank them.

And I thank you for coming over and taking a look and spending some of your day letting us know your thoughts. It matters more than you know. I remain a ball of nerves held together by coffee, perfume and sugar, but you all make it easier.

We’ll be back tomorrow morning with another Australia Institute Live – until then, as always, take care of you. Amy x

The senate is about to move on to debating the Greens motion on Trump, so to get you in the mood, here is a teaser from today’s After America podcast:

At his inauguration, Trump said he wanted to plant the ‘stars and stripes’ on Mars (the planet, not the chocolate).

Says Deakin University’s Clare Corbould on today’s episode of the After America podcast:

“That was clearly a sop to Elon Musk, who has no greater ambition than to go to Mars.”

“I mean, dude…don’t wait!”

The Coalition are running with the line that the Labor government has shelved the nature positive legislation because of a “Green-Teal-Labor deal’.

Which is quite hilarious, given the Greens and independent MPs known as teals are not exactly thrilled with Labor for discharging this bill once again. Labor is discharging the bill because the Coalition won’t work with them on it and Labor doesn’t want to do what the Greens want to do, even on the compromised bill.

So even though Labor is pulling the bill, it is not promising to never ever bring any legislation like it ever again, and therefore this is part of a big 4D chess game to align the Greens and independent demands in a future minority government.

Galaxy brain must be exhausting.

Sarah Hanson-Young is responding to the Liberal urgency motion to stop anything resembling the nature positive laws every darkening the senate chamber again (because apparently that is how democracy works) and she reads out some of the headlines in response to the government shelving the legislation:

‘Miners rejoice as Albanese shelves environmental watchdog’, ‘Albanese kills off nature positive laws’. ‘Albanese abandons environment reforms’.

Hanson Young continues:

“We can all see what has happened here, that the Labor Party has caved in to the vested interests of the fossil fuel industry and the likes of Gina Rinehart, rather than standing for what is right, protecting nature, putting in place laws that actually stop the destruction, look after our environment, stop our koalas from going extinct – the Labor Party has gone weak.

The Labor Party has caved in again. Now, the Greens have been working hard to try and get meaningful reform that would protect our ancient forests, that would stop our wildlife going extinct. We worked hard with the government to try and get a sensible package agreed to. We even put aside our policy and demands for a climate trigger, because that is what we were told by the government that they couldn’t do because the miners wouldn’t let them.

So we said, okay, we’ll compromise. We’ll be pragmatic. We’ll stand for the forest. We’ll put climate aside, the climate trigger aside until after the election, and we’ll look after the forests and the koalas today. They couldn’t even come at that. They couldn’t even come at that. The Labor Party has abandoned the environment, and if you want change, you want protection, you’re going to have to vote for it.”

Labor senator Anthony Chisholm says the government will not be supporting the motion to ban the nature positive legislation from ever seeing the light of the senate, asking if the Liberal senator wakes up wondering “what scare campaign he’ll be running today”.

Chisholm says the government “has been clear” that it will not progress the bills, and tomorrow the nature positive bills will come up with a discharge motion (which has to be voted on).

Chisholm says the government wants to “provide certainty” to the state and territory governments through the legislation, but because the Coalition “won’t work constructively” with the government, so…the government wants to shelve the bills (this was announced on the weekend)

But the Greens Sarah Hanson-Young has indicated the Greens were willing to bend on its demands, so that the bills could pass. But this is another case where the government doesn’t want to work with the Greens, so once again is pretending that the Coalition is the only side of politics it can work with to pass legislation. Because that has worked so well in the past.

Also on the senate, where senators do senate things, Liberal senator Jonathan Duniam wants the senate to block the nature positive laws (always and forever) with this urgency motion:

That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:

The need for the Nature Positive bills to be withdrawn from the Notice Paper, and for the Prime Minister to guarantee that this legislation will never be returned to the Parliament

Over in the senate, Greens senator Nick McKim has signaled the Greens will move this motion:

That the election of President Trump is a threat to Australia and the world, including his attacks on human rights, democracy and climate action, that the toxic influence of billionaires and corporations in political decision making must end, and that we must do everything we can to stop Trump-style politics coming to Australia

That will be debated in the next few minutes and will no doubt have a lot of, let’s say ‘passionate’ opinions.

Not a lot, other than we have just made it through our first QT of the year.

Well done to all of you – take a moment for a breather. Maybe get a Zooper Dooper. Or bang your head against the wall – whatever seems less painful than what we just went through.

In terms of the politics of it all, it seems like both major parties are still trying to find their footing in this parliamentary year. The Coalition spent their time asking about existing tax write offs for company lunches like it was some sort of gotcha, when in reality it just let the government jibber jabber on about their own costings of the Coalition’s small business Schnitty tax breaks.

Labor want the focus to be on what they have done to address cost of living, while the Coalition seem content to focus their energy on what is happening outside of parliament, where they are dominating the media cycle.

But it was a fairly low energy return in general to what is meant to be the centerpiece of the parliamentary day.

FINALLY.

Anthony Albanese’s office might just be reading this blog (waves) as Albanese comes back to add to his answer to Sussan Ley’s question earlier in QT:

“I was asked a question by the deputy leader of the opposition about the food prices and the figures, the latest figures to the December quarter…(there are a bunch of interjections from Ley and Dutton and Dick tells them to shut it)

Albanese:

“Year to year, food and non alcohol beverages…so those figures are the inflation rate is 3.0% and their (the Coalition) last year in office, it was 5.9%.”

Ley is OUTRAGED but Dick is not in the mood to hear the faux outrage and tells her to sit down.

And we can all move on with our lives.

For some reason, question time is continuing. Taking what is left of our life force.

Tony Burke takes a dixer to address some of the Peter Dutton rah-rah talk on visa cancellations from earlier today.

Why did the Albanese Labor Government abolish the golden ticket visa? Is the minister aware of proposals that undermine the integrity of our visa system?

Burke:

“When the member for Blair refers to the golden ticket visa, it’s the name often given to the significant investor visa. This is a visa that was abolished by this Government, and abolished for very good reason. Because it was not consistent with the integrity of the visa system that Australians would expect.

I had thought that that was bipartisan because of the serious national security reasons associated with its abolition. But over the weekend, over recent days, we’ve seen that once again, the Leader of the Opposition didn’t realise that there was a boom mic overhead. And when asked about this visa, he said, not realising that he was being heard, “I think we’ll bring it back.” Whether we do it before the election, we’ll have to consider all of that.”

Now, there has been a response from… (INTERJECTIONS) from the founder of the Magnitsky Act, Sir Bill Browder. And if those opposite want to discredit someone of that esteem, I suggest that they first go to the home page of Senator Paterson. You’ll find both Sir Bill Browder being praised in the Parliament and you’ll find his image on the home page of Senator Paterson. Here’s what he had to say about the proposal, and these are all quotes: “Reopening the door to organised crime.” I quote again, “The types of people who have taken advantage of this in the past are often the ones you least want to have coming to your country.” I quote again…”Australia is not such a poor country that it needs to prostitute itself to Chinese and Russian criminals.”

And one further quote “It seems like the kind of thing that someone might be doing just for a narrow group of political contributions”.

When it comes to immigration policy, I suggest the Australian people don’t look at what he says, but look at what he does. He opposed limiting the number of students coming in. He issued more visa than any other minister in history, and now, he is wanting his policy cash for visas.”

Burke sits down but there is a back and forth over whether or not he needs to withdraw an imputation against Peter Dutton. Burke says it was quotes. The Coalition are not having it. Burke withdraws to assist the house but Milton Dick warns it is going to have ramifications on using quotes for all sides moving forward.

Ted O’Brien is back! Awwww, we have missed Ted.

Ted wants to know:

“Can the Prime Minister provide a single example of an Australian family had a has received a $275 cut to their power bill? As was promised before the last election nearly 100 times?“

The Coalition and Labor benches both make a lot of noise.

Anthony Albanese doesn’t help that by answering with:

“I note that all Australian households, including that of the honourable member, got $300, as a direct result, as a direct result of our Government’s policy.”

He then sits down. The Coalition finds this OUTRAGEOUS. The questions move on.

Anthony Albanese takes the question in a different direction, and says:

“We do need to invest in those measures. We also need to invest in projects that help reduce the risk much damage to homes and businesses, that will put that downward pressure on insurance premiums. When I was in Darwin on Christmas day, one of the things that occurred with the commemoration of the 50th anniversary of Cyclone Tracy, that tragedy – as Darwin was built back, it was built back to be more cyclone resilient, as opposed to what was there 50 years earlier which just saw massive damage that could have been less had that not occurred.

So we do need to invest. We also are working with insurance companies through, for example, the hazards insurance partnership brings together the Australian Government and the insurance sector, creating a forum so that we can talk about how we can reduce those insurance premiums because we know that it is having a real impact and I thank the member for the ongoing interest in these serious issues.“

Or – and hear us out here, we could stop approving new coal and gas projects. REVOLUTIONARY

Independent Warringah MP Zali Steggall asks about the worsening impacts of climate disasters and the increasing difficulty in insuring against them.

You can read about some of those issues, here:

Around the world, climate change is increasing the costs of insurance and Australia is no exception.

Between 2022 and 2023, the average home insurance premium in Australia rose by 14%, the biggest rise in a decade.

Major floods in eastern Australia pushed insured losses in 2022 to a record $7 billion, almost double previous records. Perhaps more alarmingly, since 2013, insured losses in each year have exceeded the combined losses of the five years from 2000 to 2004.

Modelling from The McKell Institute estimated that the direct cost of natural disasters in Australia could reach $35 billion per year (in 2022 dollars) by mid-century, an average of more than $2,500 per household per year. However, such averages hide more than they reveal. In areas at high risk of extreme weather events, insurance costs are multiples of national averages.

Michael Sukkar asks Anthony Albanese:

“My question is to the Prime Minister. On what date was the Prime Minister first advised of the planned mass casualty terror attack against Sydney’s Jewish community?“

That is because we know that the PM was told of the find and investigation a lot earlier than it went public (NSW police said they went public earlier than they wanted after a leak to News Corp about the find and investigation.)

Albanese chooses his words very carefully here:

“I thank the member for his question and it goes to national security issues. On our national security, there are two priorities. The first priority is, of course, keeping the public safe. The second and related principle is that we engage with the Australian Federal Police and the national intelligence agencies, we don’t go out there and brief about national security committee meetings.

We don’t – we don’t discuss those details because it’s an ongoing investigation. (There are interjections from the Coalition here)

…What you do when you have an ongoing investigation is that you take the advice of the Australian Federal Police and the ASIO Director-General. And that is precisely what I have done the whole way through.

Now, the Leader of the Opposition is always made available briefings when they’re requested. He’s not requested a briefing from – at this time. He has had, he said on Sunday, that he had text messages with the ASIO Director-General. When asked by David Speers what was in those text messages, he quite rightly – quite rightly – refused the say, because that’s how you deal with these things. This isn’t some game.

This isn’t some game and it should not be about politics. And quite frankly, it is astonishing…”

Sukkar has a point of order:

“On relevance – we’ve asked for the date, not the detail. The date. And Premier Minns made the date clear, so I’m sure that the Prime Minister is not accusing Premier Minns of having done anything improper.”

And Albanese continues:

“There are some people who, in the past, have understood why these issues are important, that we back up our National Security Agencies rather than seek to undermine them.

And one of those was, indeed, quoted in February 2022 when the former government was in place. [Albanese reads from an old article] ‘The chair of Parliament’s joint committee [which included] the Liberal Senator James Patterson has rebuked defence minister Peter Dutton for referencing classified information during last week’s hyperpartisan brawling over national security’.

Of course, that was when the Leader of the Opposition was claiming both open source and other intelligence I see, confirmed that Labor was somehow, according to him, Beijing’s pick at the 2022 election. That, of course, was before he became pro-China just last week.”

Albanese runs out of time, but what he is referencing at the end there is the Coalition’s reverse ferret on issues pertaining to China, after focus groups found that the Chinese-Australian community are fans of the normalising of relations between Australia and China under the Albanese government but are not overly fans of the Coalition’s reaction to China. And now that the Coalition want to win back seats like Chisholm, suddenly China isn’t as interesting to the Coalition as the Big Bad of security threats. Funny that.

Independent MP Rebekha Sharkie has the next crossbench question and asks:

Between June 2022 and June 2024, the Australian population increased by 1.19 million, 4.4%. Over that time, Commonwealth supported places for medicine have effectively stayed the same with 1-in-3 GPs set to retire, the AMA has forecast a shortfall of 10,000 GPs in Australia. Will you urgently lift the number of Commonwealth-supported places to study medicine to help address the doctor shortage in Australia?

Jason Clare responds:

“Can I thank the member for her question as she would know in budget two years ago, we allocated extra places for medical studies at university, that’s thing we did in consultation with the Minister for Health, that’s something that’s always under consideration by this Government.

As I have said in this chamber many times, I want more people to get a crack at going to university or go to TAFE. That’s why we’re making the changes that we are whether it’s making TAFE free which the opposition are opposed to or whether it’s cutting the cost of university by cutting student debt by 20%. In December, we released the midyear economic update where we allocated additional funding to university to help more young people get a crack at going to university including – and I know this is important to the member because she’s contacted me on a number of occasions about young people being able to study far away from capital cities – the announcement we made yesterday around a university study hub at Kangaroo Island is a classic example of that.

Extra funding to help children from poor backgrounds and from regional Australia to get the support they need not just to start a university degree, but to finish it, real demand-driven needs-based funding to help more students not just start a degree, but finish it so that we get the doctors that we need, the teachers that we need, the nurses that we need, the psychologists that we need, the social workers that we need – all of the skilled workforce that we need to build Australia’s future.”

The prime minister though doesn’t have a Grogs (who should be resting!) on staff and so instead answers that question on the inflation rate.

Albanese:

“Indeed it, goes to cost of living and it goes to inflation. And what we know is that inflation is now at 2.4% – less than in the bottom half of what the Reserve Bank range of 2% to 3%, their target range, is. We know that when we were elected, it had a “6” in front of it. And of course, the price of all goods and services feed into those inflationary figures. We know, as well, that the underlying rate is down to 3.2%. And we know, as well, that the response of those opposite has been to never be more upset than when inflation was going down. Never be more upset. They went out there…”

Ley wants the number though and raises a point of order:

“The Prime Minister appears to be in some parallel universe. These figures are readily available. It’s a question about the increase in the percentage rate, by percentage rate, of the cost of food since Labor was elected.“

(Sussan Ley accusing someone else of being in a parallel universe is quite funny)

Milton Dick says it is up to Albanese if he gives the figure or not, but he has to be relevant. Albanese is not relevant. Michael Sukkar is very upset. Dick puts on what everyone in Queensland politics knows is his ‘Dugald’ (his given first name) voice and tells Sukkar he’ll rule as he sees fit. Albanese continues on inflation.

These people all earn at least $200,000 a year.

Back to the mess that is the first federal QT of the year and it is Sussan Ley time! Hi Sussan!

“Prime Minister, by what percentage has the cost of food increased since the election of the Albanese Labor government?”

We can answer that!

Food and non-alcoholic beverage have gone up 12% since June 2022

But in June 2020 they were going up 5.9% a year, now they are rising at 3.0%

And then there is that whole price gouging thing and also the revelations of Coles and Woolworths taking turns in having ‘sales’.

While we have been concentrating on question time, there has been moves in NSW politics:

NSW Transport Minister Jo Haylen has resigned. As AAP reports:

A senior minister accused of repeatedly using taxpayer-funded drivers for non-work purposes has bowed to increasing pressure and quit cabinet.

NSW Premier Chris Minns had defended Transport Minister Jo Haylen after a series of car-related scandals in which she tasked a driver to take her to a boozy winery lunch and drop her children off at weekend sport in Sydney.

But Ms Haylen announced she would quit her cabinet post on Tuesday afternoon while continuing to serve in her local electorate.

“I’ve made some mistakes, people aren’t perfect,” she told reporters.

“I did not break the rules, but I acknowledge that’s not the only test here … I’ve let the public down and I’m very sorry for that.”

For reasons which escape me, apparently the biggest issue facing the nation at the moment is….Schnitty Tax Breaks.

Angus Taylor asks ANOTHER question asking about the tax breaks for big business when it comes to catering their meetings (I can not believe I just typed that sentence).

Treasurer, a large company can cater for a lunch with food and alcohol in its boardroom worth thousands of dollars and can claim that cost as a tax deduction. What is the cost of this tax policy to the budget?”

Jim Chalmers responds:

Their policy for lower wages for workers and longer lunches for bosses is a matter of fairness – but not the way that they think it is. Not the way that they think it is. And if the member for Hume wants to be the Treasurer of this country, he really should know that the numbers that he is asking for are not itemised in the budget. And that’s because they are part of the tax base, and we’re not proposing to change it. The only party in here proposing to make it easier for bosses to claim long lunches, paid for by workers and taxpayers, is those opposite, Mr Speaker.

They are the only ones – proposing to change these arrangements. I can hear him chirping away. He hasn’t been this unhappy since inflation came in at the lower end of the RBA target band.

There are once again a flurry of points of orders and arguments about whether or not the treasurer is in order (he is) and whether Peter Dutton can keep making political statements in raising points of orders (he can’t, but that’s not going to stop him).

Chalmers then comes back to his favourite topic and his reason for getting out of bed in the morning – slamming Angus Taylor:

“We tried to warn the Opposition Leader that, if you put this bloke in charge of the costings, it would go bad. And it turns out it did.”

He is out of time.

There is another dixer and this time it is to education minister Jason Clare, who is asked about the Hecs changes.

Clare says:

If you want a good example of the difference between Labor and Liberal, then this is it. We’re cutting HECS debt for 3 million Australians, and they want to cut the cost of lunch for bosses. That’s it in a nutshell. We’ve already cut HECS debt by more than $3 billion for 3 million Australians. We passed those laws late last year and, over Christmas, the ATO made this change. Cutting the debt of 3 million Australians. But there’s more to do, and there’s more that we will do. If we win the next election, we will cut all student debts by a further 20%. That means that somebody with an average HECS debt today of $27,000 will see that debt cut by more than $5,000. And if they’ve got a HECS debt of $50,000, then that’ll be cut by $10,000. That’s a lot of help for a lot of young people just out of uni, just getting started. And what do you think the Liberals think of all of this? They’re opposed to that.”

The lunch zingers continue. Apparently Australians will now look at people pulling out credit cards at company lunches at cafes and wonder if they are now paying for it. Given most Australians are hard pressed paying rent and buying a take away coffee these days, that might be a bit of an over exaggeration.

And on HECs, it is always worth remembering that students raise more money for Treasury than gas companies pay in PRRT.

Oh – and it is still really expensive to get a degree.

https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/university-is-expensive/

In less than 20 years, the average HECS-HELP debt for people in their 20s has more than doubled.

Without lowering the cost of expensive and popular courses, the Albanese government’s recently proposed changes to HECS indexation rates will not do enough to address the growing debt that university students face today.

Greens leader Adam Bandt asks the first of the crossbench questions. It is to Anthony Albanese:

One in three big corporations in this country pays no tax. Zero dollars in tax. Meanwhile, people can’t afford basics like going to the dentist. Why does a nurse from Coburg North pay more tax than a multinational corporation? Why won’t you make big corporations pay tax to get dental into Medicare so that, in this wealthy country of ours, everyone can get the healthcare they need?

Might be a good time to remind you of these facts:

Key facts:

• Foreign-owned gas companies export 80% of Australia’s gas
• Nurses and teachers pay more tax than the gas industry
• To date, not a single LNG project has paid a cent in Petroleum Resource Rent Tax

Anthony Albanese doesn’t bring up those facts, and instead says:

“On tax policy, in spite of his general observation, the truth is that many big companies do pay considerable amounts of tax and revenue that is then used to fund health and education.“

He goes on to say:

“We on this side of the House will always look to do more when it comes to healthcare. We will look at sensible ways of being able to move forward, because we understand how important that is. And it’s one of the great divides in Australian politics. On the weekend, we celebrated the 41st birthday of Medicare, proudly created by Labor, always strengthened by Labor.”

Oh God. Anthony Albanese then tries out a new line, which Patrick Gorman started this morning and we all hoped had been left in the bin. Where it belongs.

Albanese:

We’re thinking outside of the box, they’re thinking inside the lunchbox.

For Dolly’s sake will someone please address housing. The climate. Worsening inequality. Growing hatred on our streets. The attacks against vulnerable communities, including trans kids. The world being on fire. ANYTHING other than this guff.

The back and forths continue until we are all the metaphorical puddle on the pub floor after eating a parmi the size of Texas (Queensland) but Jim Chalmers holds back on asking whether it is now Coalition policy to raise taxes for big businesses.

Not that this would be a bad thing. Big business should be paying more tax. But lets not pretend that there is some sort of altruistic spirit behind the Coalition’s Schnitty tax breaks.

The Labor MP for Cooper, Ged Kearney, becomes the first person booted from QT in 2025. What an honour!

Angus Taylor has a question and the Labor benches (and some of the Coalition MPs) groan. Fair.

Taylor:

Treasurer, unlike small businesses, big businesses like Coles and Woolworths and Qantas can cater in house in their corporate boardrooms and do so as a tax deduction. How much does this cost the budget?

The Coalition MPs then act like they have undercovered Watergate (which lets be honest, would barely be a tweet these days) and Jim Chalmers fronts up to pretend to answer:

I was sitting there hoping they’d double down on this policy. It turns out that they have and I couldn’t be happier about that, Mr Speaker! (Labor laughs because politicians trade a sense of humour for a chance to sit on an 80s chair in the Australian parliament).

If I’m honest with you. Now, Mr Speaker, two points about the Shadow Treasurer’s question. First of all, only the Liberal and National Parties could see taxpayers and workers funding between 1.6 billion and 10 billion to shout their bosses lunch as an issue of fairness.

Only those opposite could see that as an issue of social justice, Mr Speaker. And an issue of fairness. The second point I would make is this e Mr Speaker: The nerve of these characters on a day when they have been sprung not releasing the cost of their own policy, jumping up and asking about the costing on a policy which has been longstanding…

That sets off a never ending back and forth over relevance, standing orders, and who can be more clever about not addressing issues at hand.

Labor’s Sharon Claydon gets the first dixer (a government question written by either the government tactics team or the minister’s office and asked of a government minister – it is named for advice columnist Dorothy Dix who used to write her own questions in the column she helmed) and it is:

How is the Albanese Labor Government’s responsible, economic management helping in the fight against inflation? And are there any approaches that would leave people worse off?

‘Great question’ says someone from the Labor benches who obviously has no joy in their life, if this question is their benchmark for ‘great’.

Jim Chalmers takes it to his new favourite topic – the long lunch write off (which does not include alcohol) the Coalition has offered up and everyone pretends this is the biggest issue facing Australians at the moment.

Peter Dutton opens the questions with the most obvious – a variation of a Coalition favourite – why is the Labor government so crap.

Dutton:

My question is to the Prime Minister: Under this this weak Albanese Government interest rates have increased 12 times, energy bills have risen by $1,000, living standards have collapsed, 27,000 businesses have gone insolvent and we’re at a record breaking household recession. Will the Prime Minister now apologise for promising Australians they would be better off and admit they can’t afford another three years of this weak Albanese Labor Government?

Just in case you didn’t catch it ‘weak Albanese government’ is one of the election slogans. Anthony Albanese responds with the low energy version of a press release (he obviously has the key points in front of him) which we don’t need to bore you with here (he treats it like a dixer).

Michael Sukkar gets to stand up and make his QT debut as the member for opposition business and Tony Burke gets to once again show he knows more about the standing orders than anyone of the Coalition benches and the ensuring back and forth seems to give Albanese some energy.

He finishes with:

If they had their way, there wouldn’t be cheaper medicines. If they had their way, there wouldn’t be cheaper child care. If they had their way, there wouldn’t have been any rebates on energy bills. If they had their way, there wouldn’t be tax cuts for every taxpayer.

And we now know that they have come up with a cost-of-living plan but it’s just not for workers, it’s for workers to pay for some of their mates to have lunch.

Peter Dutton also adds his thoughts on the climate disasters facing the nation on indulgence:

As the Prime Minister points out, we’re a land of great contrasts and over the break, I was with the member for Wannon and the member for Mallee in the Grampians looking at the devastation there that families faced in those small businesses and those communities.

We met with the firefighters and the rural fire brigade and the work they were doing. As a country, thank goodness, we have these people who are prepared to sacrifice in some cases their own homes and livelihoods to keep their communities safe.

And the work that is underway in North Queensland at the moment not just the response to the initial devastation, but to the clean-up will be quite phenomenal and we offer on a bipartisan basis to the Prime Minister whatever support is required to help those people through their darkest hour. I might just say on a following note in a very Australian iconic scene – I have photos sent through from friends in Townsville before who have sort of a small patch of grass left just at the backyard, the flood waters have almost inundated the home. On that grass stands about 60 kangaroos who have sought refuge from the rising flood waters.

It shows the many aspects to the devastation of the environment, to the community, and the lives of those people and the disruption to them and the schools that are closed, etc. There’s a lot of work ahead to help rebuild that part of the world and we stand ready to provide that support to them.

Again, if only someone was in some sort of position of power to actually do something to address these issues more widely to protect Australians from worsening climate disasters! Oh I know – let’s pretend we are going to do nuclear! That will do it!

The first question time of the year is about to get underway.
Speaker Milton Dick announces that Bob Katter is not in the parliament today because of the north Queensland floods, and takes the opportunity for the chamber to acknowledge the floods and the communities currently experiencing climate disasters.

If only someone in that chamber had some power to do something to ensure they didn’t get any worse!

Anthony Albanese speaks on indulgence on the floods and says he has spoken to Katter, Qld premier David Crisafulli and has also received a briefing on what is happening across the nation at the moment:

One of the things about this country is when you have a briefing and there’s flooding and massive torrential rain in the north, but extraordinary heatwaves in southern Australia, you do realise the extent of danger that we face and the fact that we could have more than one type of natural disaster at once really places a strain on emergency services.

Gee. If only the government could act. Lucky we have thoughts and prayers!

Looks like the report into the statutory review of the online safety act has been tabled. You can find the whole report, here

Given the media coverage, there has been some of this dropped out, but the whole report provides a bit more context, including what the ‘duty of care’ will mean for tech companies.

Turning to social media for a moment (and a much needed palette cleanser) and this scene from Ferris Bueller’s Day Off has been doing the rounds. Why? A little thing called…history.

The chamber has moved into the airing of the grievances (also known as members statements) which means it is now almost time for the first question time of the year.

Please, grab what you need to get through it. At this point I wouldn’t blame you if a lobotomy was part of that.

Going back to 2020 when ASIO chief Mike Burgess elevated rightwing terrorism as as growing threat in Australia during his annual state of the security state speech (in 2020 he mentioned rightwing extremism about six times), Peter Dutton, who was then Home Affairs minister, immediately pivoted to ‘leftwing extremism’ which had not been mentioned. He justified that pivot by claiming that Islamic terrorism was ‘leftwing’.

He said on 25 February 2020:

You can use Islamic extremist, you get in trouble for using that, you can use leftwing to describe everybody from the left to the right. I said today I don’t care where people are on the spectrum, if they pose a threat to our country and want to do harm to Australians then they are in our sights.

I am completely blind to where people are on the spectrum.

I just find it such a semantic and nonsense debate, if people are involved in a right-wing organisation, they are planning an attack, they are acting outside of the law, they will be treated no differently than somebody who is an Islamic extremist that is planning an attack in the same way.

So five years ago, rightwing extremism (which included neo-Nazis) was leftwing because according to 2020 Dutton, you can “use leftwing to describe everybody from the left to the right” but 2025 Dutton thinks anyone protesting genocidal acts of a nation state against another nation state is anti-Semitic, although neo-Nazis literally marching Australian streets is largely greeted with silence.

Right. Got it.

Labor MP Linda Burney has also spoken on the motion and she is one of the only ones to take aim at Peter Dutton and the Coalition for politicising the issue:

…Leadership is understanding that these anti-Semitic Acts and acts of racism divide people. They hurt people. They stay with you. And let me tell you, I can speak from personal experience about that.

So instead of trying to make this a political issue, instead of trying to paint one side one way and one side the other, why don’t we show the Australian community an act of bipartisanship, an act of not accepting what’s been going on, an act that will provide to the Australian people that we are one in rejecting racism, in rejecting anti-Semitism and in rejecting hate in this country that is required by this parliament, not what we are seeing now, where there is the attempt to sow division here.

How can the Australian people have any faith in its political leadership? We cannot come together on this one. I urge everyone to do it. I am proud to be part of the government who has made many, many moves and done many things to support social cohesion in this country, to call out anti-Semitism as absolutely unacceptable. I’m proud of that

...And you cannot rewrite history and you cannot rewrite the truth. Politicising this issue is reprehensible. It’s unacceptable. It is not a display of leadership to the Australian community

Back in the house and LNP MP Andrew Wallace has taken the debate…places. None of them good.

There is only so much conflation of facts and re-writing of a narrative one can stomach while watching Auspol. It does no one any favours to be so entirely one-eyed for pure political gain, and it certainly does not address the simmering hatreds threatening Australian cohesion.

Australia’s security agencies were warning of the rise of the far-right, which included Nazis, under the Coalition government, while Peter Dutton was the minister heading those agencies. That included when their were literal Nazis marching Australian streets.

Dutton’s response was to label extremist Islamic terrorism ‘leftwing terrorism’ and attack ‘leftwing lunatics’

There was no immediate response from Dutton when neo-Nazis marched in Adelaide’s CBD on January 26.

Hatred should always be called out. But that is all hate. Consistently. Not just where someone may see political gain.

Over in the senate, the chamber is also discussing an anti-Semitism motion. Independent senator Jacqui Lambie has put forward this one:

That the Senate:
(a) deplores the appalling and unacceptable rise in antisemitism across
Australia – including violent attacks on synagogues, schools, homes,
and childcare centres;
(b) unequivocally condemns antisemitism in all its forms; and
(c) resolves that all parliamentarians will work constructively together to
combat the scourge of antisemitism in Australia.

Liberal senator James Paterson then tries to amend it to add in:

(d) calls on the Government to support:
i. strengthening the penalties for those who urge or threaten
attacks against places of worship;
ii. strengthening the sentencing regime for terrorism by legislating
for a mandatory minimum term of 6 years imprisonment for all acts
of terrorism under Commonwealth law; and
iii. the introduction of mandatory minimum sentences of 12 months
imprisonment for the display of prohibited anti-Semitic and
terrorist organisation symbols and related behaviour in public, and
increase the maximum penalty to 5 years prison.

While independent senator Lidia Thorpe wants the senate to debate:

That the motion be amended to read as follows:
That the Senate:
(a) deplores the appalling and unacceptable rise in antisemitism across
Australia – including violent attacks on synagogues, schools, homes,
and childcare centres;
(b) unequivocally condemns antisemitism and racism in all its forms; and
(c) resolves that all parliamentarians will work constructively together to
combat the scourge of antisemitism and racism in Australia.

Wentworth independent MP Allegra Spender has previewed some of the amendments she wants to make to the hate law legislation. From her release:

Under the current Bill, the promotion of violence and hatred is not considered a crime unless it explicitly urges or threatens violence. This leaves a gaping hole that is being exploited by certain groups and individuals who are still able to glorify and promote hatred with impunity.  

These statements have a cumulative effect that often leads to violence, fear and division.

Peter Dutton then addresses the motion and well. It is certainly one side of what has been happening in Australia.

To be clear, no one is denying that anti-Semitism is not an issue, or that it must be terrifying for Jewish people to experience those threats. All hatred must be addressed and those who threaten people on the basis of identity, race or religion absolutely most be held accountable.

However, it is also true that people have been witnessing terrifying actions in Gaza and Palestine, which have been carried out by the Israeli Defence Forces and that there are human rights and ICC investigations into those actions. There have been protests, which have included members of the Jewish community, against the actions of the IDF.

Two things can be true at the same time. Peter Dutton does not bring any nuance to his contribution though, and conflates all things together. He also denied there was this “sort of hatred and this sort of racism…being conveyed against any other pocket of the Australian community”:

Now I want to thank the member for Wentworth for bringing forward this motion. It is true, though, that we worked with the member for Wentworth and the government to see struck out the original words which were contained in paragraph two, which read… ‘as we condemn all similar hatred directed to any groups in our community’.

Now the member agreed to that form of words being struck out because we don’t think that was necessary.

We also think it is inexplicable to try and mount the argument that this sort of hatred and this sort of racism and this sort of anti-Semitism is being conveyed against any other pocket of the Australian community. We voted against the government’s motion because it stopped us from moving amendments to the members motion, which would have strengthened the motion and provided stronger support to the community, and we’ll continue to do that in further forms of this Parliament.

Anthony Albanese goes through the measures the government has taken and then says:

We saw hatred in the October 7 attacks. The same hatred fueled the fire that devastated the Israel Synagogue in Melbourne. The same hatred for those who targeted child care center in Moore, these acts of hatred are an assault on the rights of every that every Australian cherished, in addition to the laws we have passed, this government has made multiple commitments and investments to combat anti-Semitism. They include establishing Special Operation avalanche to respond to and investigate anti-Semitic attacks.

…We want to make sure that we have not just the words as we repeat them never again. We want to make sure that this is a reality, and we know that anti-Semitism has given dark shadows across generations. I say to Jewish Australians, live proudly. Stand tall. You belong here, and Australia stands with you.

Anthony Albanese continues:

Our government is committed to keeping the community safe, we have not wavered. Anti-Semitism stands in vile opposition to all we are as a nation and all that we have built together over generations, it has no place in our nation, and we’ll combat it with the full force of our laws and with total commitment from every level of government.

Some of the horrendous acts have led to arrests. More will follow. We have a simple message to those cowards and criminals engaged in these low acts of hatred, you will be caught. You will be punished. Our government has no tolerance for your actions. That is why we introduced a landmark ban on the Nazi salute hate symbols, the first ever, which came into effect in January last year. It’s also why we criminalised doxing legislation that some failed to support in this Parliament, just at the end of last year, our groundbreaking legislation has made it easier for our lower law enforcement bodies to deal with the perpetrators of anti-Semitic acts. But it cannot be our only tool. Hatred feeds on ignorance, and ignorance thrives in darkness. So as we fight these crimes of bigotry in the present, we are building for a better future through the life of education and memory.

The prime minister is now speaking on the motion put forward by Allegra Spender.

He says:

I want to speak about the issue that’s actually before us. The first day that this parliament sat after the terrorist atrocities of October 7, 2023 overwhelmingly, this parliament voted for a motion overwhelmingly. It said in clause three, this house condemns anti-Semitism and recognises that generations of Jewish people have been subject to this hateful prejudice.

I said this on that day.

I know I speak for every member of this House when I say that this kind of hateful prejudice has no place in Australia. The awful anti-Semitism chanted by some of the protesters at the Sydney Opera House is beyond offensive. It is a betrayal of our Australian values. We reject it and we condemn it. Our country is better than that, and our country is a better place because of our Jewish community.

The LNP’s Julian Leeser is now speaking on the motion, calling it a “domestic terrorist crisis” in the country “the sort of which Australia has never experienced”.

He then criticises Labor and the teals (maybe forgetting that it was Allegra Spender who brought this motion)

Leeser:

If you criticize this government, Labor and the Teal say you are politicising the issue. This is despite the fact that Jewish communal leaders, former Labor MPs and Labor Party members, are making the same criticisms that I, the leader of the Opposition and my colleagues are making.

Let me be clear, I will not cop criticism for standing up for my family, my community, or the country I love, in the face of a government that has constantly let down the Jewish community and every law abiding Australian who just wants to live in a country where they are afforded the full protection of the law. Australians want to see this government do all that they can, but the Prime Minister and the government have failed to do all they can, there has been moral equivalence, right from the beginning.

Leeser then brings in the university protests, and the regular street marches which were overwhelming standing against genocide, claiming “Jew haters” were allowed to “run amok on campuses”.

The protests were established in response to the actions of the Israeli military in Gaza, and the West Bank, which multiple credible organisations have established as carrying all the hallmarks of a genocide, an established charge being investigated by the International Criminal Court.

Labor MP Josh Burns is speaking on the motion now and says he will work with anyone to address the issue.

We cannot let anti-Semitism become a partisan issue. It has never existed on a political spectrum. And I say there are things that I disagree with the Liberal Party about, but not this. I will work with anyone, and I have stood with anyone in the past in order to ensure that we present a united voice on this, that we confront this together, that we restore Australia together. And I would urge all members of the House join us in coming together to send the clearest of messages that we will not fight because the fight is not in here, it is for the Jewish people of Australia.

This is personal. I want this to end. I want this all to end. First of all, I can’t I dread of turning on my phone and looking at the news seeing another attack. We want this to be over, so we need to commit ourselves and take on the full responsibility of taking this on and doing whatever is in our power to combat it. We have increased security, we have banned Nazi salutes, we’ve criminalized doxing, we’ve appointed a special envoy to combat anti-Semitism, and over summer, I spent countless hours holding our university Vice Chancellors to account to ensure that students who return to university on day one have a safe place to go, but we need to do more. We are going to work together this week to create new laws to outlaw hate and incitement. We need to protect people from that. Anti-Semitism is a wicked problem. It has existed. It has always been there in Australia, but it’s laid dormant and is always been in the corners of our society. Well, it is not anymore, and it is up to each and every member of this house to stand firmly and strongly, to do whatever is in our power to ensure that Australia is a safe place for the Jewish people, because it is not just the Jewish people who are watching.

The motion, as put forward by Wentworth independent MP Allegra Spender reads:

That this House: 
1) Deplores the appalling and unacceptable rise in antisemitism across Australia – including violent attacks on synagogues, schools, homes, and childcare centres; 

2) Unequivocally condemns antisemitism in all its forms; and

3) Resolves that all parliamentarians will work constructively together to combat the scourge of antisemitism in Australia

The wash up of all of that was, the standing orders are suspended to debate the motion, as put forward by Wentworth MP Allegra Spender, with each MP given five minutes to speak, no amendments to the motion can be made, the question has to be put (voted on) no later than 1.25pm and only a minister can vary those orders.

The debate begins.

The house of reps then moved on to a motion relating to anti-Semitism, which was put forward by independent MP Allegra Spender.

There has been some too-and-fro with parliamentary gamemanship, but Tony Burke is moving that the motion be debated after the matter of public importance (which is the debate immediately after question time) which also puts it out of the main news cycle, occurring too late for the evening news and some print deadlines.

OK, so the parliament is sitting. LNP MP Keith Pitt’s resignation has officially been accepted by the speaker, but there will be no byelection because the general election is so close (which is the same as Bill Shorten’s seat).

We understand preselection is underway in Hinkler (and that the branch looks like making the decision, which is noteworthy in this climate!)

There were also a buttload of bills (the technical term) of bills which have been given royal assent by the Governor-General

You can find that list, here.

Ahhh, the parliament sitting is about to begin in earnest.

Go grab a coffee, or matcha, or whatever takes your fancy while we relocate and then we’ll get underway covering the parliamentary happenings.

Returning to the rah-rah Peter Dutton gave the Coalition troops in the joint party room meeting this morning (the public one with the cameras present – the meeting continued in private) he once again gave some favoured numbers:

When I was Immigration Minister and Home Affairs Minister we cancelled 6,300 visas of people who had committed serious crimes against Australian citizens. The government has dropped the ball in relation to that important issue. I think we need to have a strong approach to keeping our country safe, to making sure that we can stamp out anti-Semitism and we don’t do that by trying to pander to the left and to the Greens.

Not to make this an issue about migration, or to cheerlead for visa cancellations, but it is worth noting that about 95% of those cancellations Dutton brags about, were mandatory – which means that there were breaches (court convictions with minimum 12 month sentences etc) which led to the automatic cancellation of the visas. Which is part of the normal work of the department and happens no matter who is the minister.

So Dutton is taking credit for the work of the department. Kinda funny given he is also banging on about wanting to cut the public service which makes up those departments.

The ABS has released the spending data Grogs previewed a little earlier. Senior economist Matt Grudnoff has taken a look at the figures;

The ABS has released data on monthly household spending. It shows a small uptick of 0.4% for the month. While this is encouraging, it comes after months of data showing households are struggling. This is consistent with yesterday’s retail trade figures for the December quarter, which showed an increase in volume terms. But this is an increase from a very low base. If you look at the last two and half years, the volume of retail sales has gone backwards.

What does this mean for interest rates? The inflation rate continues to come down with headline inflation now well and truly in the RBA’s target band. Almost everyone now expects the RBA to cut rates at its meeting later this month.

The ABS data continues to show that households have been smashed. The RBA has run out of excuses not to cut rates.

Ok, Grogs is back in bed. Good.

Let’s check in on the US, where AAP reports a new energy secretary has been confirmed:

The US Senate has confirmed Chris Wright, a fracking executive, to be President Donald Trump’s energy secretary.

The vote was 59-38.

Wright, 60, the CEO of Liberty Energy since 2011 has said he will step down from the company once confirmed. 

He wrote in a Liberty report last year he believes human-caused climate change is real, but that its hazards are “distant and uncertain.” He has also said top-down governmental policies to curb it are destined to fail.

Wright will be in charge of an agency that has about a $US50 billion ($A81 billion) budget with about half of that going to maintain the country’s nuclear weapons stockpile.

He will also be in charge of the department’s 17 national labs that cover everything from research fusion energy to super-computing.

The centrepiece of Trump’s energy policy is “drill, baby, drill,” and he has pledged to dismantle what he calls Democrats’ “green new scam” in favour of boosting production of fossil fuels such as oil, natural gas and coal that emit planet-warming greenhouse gases.

Oh good. What could go wrong? It’s not as if Australia would ever put a gas executive in charge of an energy policy….oh wait. We did that with Morrison. Carry on.

Greg Jericho has promised he will go back to bed – after this post.

With Trump backing down on putting tariffs on Canada and Mexico (because it was all a bluff and he just needed to come up with a fake reason to look like he was tough and had “won”) the Australian dollar is back to where it was before yesterday’s
“plunge” .

Key takeaway – unless you are someone mainlining caffeine (and other drugs) through your veins while trading on the foreign exchange market, you really should not worry too much about headlines about the dollar sinking/plunging/falling.

Also remember a falling dollar actually make our exports cheaper to buy.

The crossbench want the Albanese government to fulfill their promises of creating a more even playing ground for independents and minor parties when it comes to electoral spending laws.

So far, David Pocock and Jacqui Lambie say, that is not happening.

The pair spoke to ABC Radio National Breakfast to speak about the issues they have with the political donation ‘reforms’ (anyone who has had a look at the offering know it is not really a reform, but more of a tinkering of the status quo)

Jim Chalmers addressed some of the criticism:

“A change of this magnitude requires the broadest possible support. And I have got a lot of time for both those senators (Pocock and Lambie), but primarily this is about attracting as broad a support as we can…”

Broad support apparently means cutting out most of the crossbench and making a deal with the Coalition.

You can read more about some of those issues, here

https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/electoral-reform-bill-analysis/

And chief economist Greg Jericho, who should be resting after a nasty bike accident over the weekend (he is OK, but he should be in bed!) has also popped in with a post for you:

Ahead of today’s data on Household spending, some news on the inflation front came out yesterday in the Retail Trade figures. (https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/industry/retail-and-wholesale-trade/retail-trade-australia/dec-2024)

While they showed that the volume of retail spending (ie taking inflation into account) was up 1.1% in the 2024, the ABS noted that on a per capita basis the 0.5% rise in the December quarter was the first rise in per capita spending since peaking in June quarter 2022. This follows a flat result last quarter which was preceded by eight straight quarterly per capita volumes falls. Despite the rise, retail spending on a per person basis is down 0.9% (-$34.6) compared to this time last year.

The quarterly figures also give us some info on the price rises.

• Food items rose 4.0% down from 4.3% in the September quarter
• The prices of household goods (think Bunnings and Harvey Norman) were completely flat over the past year (0%)
• Clothing prices were up 1.2% a bit up from the 1.0% in September, but no real change
• Other retailing (hairdressing, car mechanics etc) prices were up 3.6% – that was a jump from 2.6% in September. So if the RBA were looking for ANY reason to keep rates steady that would be it as Other retailing is generally pretty labour intensive so it might be a sign that wage in that sector will rise as well (but seriously, not)
• Café, restaurant and takeaway prices only rose 3.0% down from 3.3% in September – so this is a sign for the RBA not to worry because cafes etc are also labour intensive.
• Total retailing prices rose 2.6%. Up a bit from the 2.4% in the year to September. Higher than the RBA would like, but hardly a sign that inflation is rising to fast.

He also gave you a graph, but I just have to sort out the embedding first and then I will begin popping those up.

Polly Hemming, Director of the Australia Institute’s Climate & Energy program wants to remind you about next week’s Climate Integrity Summit:

With Australia’s future increasingly vulnerable to political uncertainty in the United States, the Australia Institute’s Climate Integrity Summit could not be more timely. As the world’s 13th largest economy and third largest fossil fuel exporter, Australia sits at a crucial crossroads. The summit brings together prominent international and local experts to examine how Australia can insulate itself from geopolitical uncertainty and contribute to stability and decarbonisation in the Asia Pacific region. 

With sessions exploring Australia’s outsized influence in our region and our unique position to support trading partners, regional neighbours, and those most vulnerable to the climate crisis, the summit will map out the international implications of the 2025 federal election. Far from being merely a policy-taker, Australia has both the capability and responsibility to demonstrate leadership and forge genuine international collaboration at this pivotal moment.

Speakers include:

• Antonia Burke, Community Leader
• Craig Foster AM, Human rights activist & Australian retired soccer player
• Senator David Pocock, Independent Senator for the Australian Capital Territory
• The Hon Doug Cameron, Former Senator for New South Wales
• Dr Emma Shortis, International & Security Affairs Director, The Australia Institute
• Dr Helder da Costa, General Secretary, The g7+ Secretariat
• Her Excellency Ilana Seid, Ambassador and Permanent Representative for the Republic of Palau to the United Nations
• Jennifer Robinson, Australian human rights lawyer, Doughty Street Chambers in London (Jennifer Robinson appears by arrangement with Claxton Speakers International.)
• Jonathan Birchall, Lecturer, International and Public Affairs Department, Columbia University & Lead Communications Officer, Open Society Foundations
• Dr Mila Rosenthal, Executive Director, International Science Reserve & Co-founder, Planet Reimagined
• Polly Hemming, Climate & Energy Director, The Australia Institute
• Dr Richard Denniss, Executive Director, The Australia Institute
• Savenaca Narube, Unity Fiji Party Leader & Former Governor of the Reserve Bank of Fiji
• Dr Shanta Barley, Chief Climate Scientist, Fortescue
• Dr Yuki Tanabe, Sustainable Development and Aid Program Coordinator, Japan Center for a Sustainable Environment and Society

The Climate Integrity Summit is a non-partisan event that convenes leading experts in economics, ecology, policy and governance to discuss a credible and achievable climate policy that serves the Australian people and broader global community.

Peter Dutton also said:

When you look at what the Prime Minister is doing on energy policy at the moment which is a train wreck, they have created a housing crisis through their migration and economic policies. Look at what they have done in the economy, they have created an economic crisis.

It is utterly incredible how much power the Albanese government apparently has – creating a global inflation crisis even before they were elected, which impacted most nation’s economies and led to populist far right politicians gaining massive footholds in democracies – just incredible!

And while Labor can take no credit for actually improving the housing affordability crisis, it seems Dutton also wants Labor to take ownership of the 10 or so years the Coalition was in power, because apparently nothing could be done about housing by the Coalition while they were in government, but it is very, very important to do something now. What that something is in regards to the economy, energy and housing is, is still unclear as the Coalition have voted against most policy offerings from the government (and yet both sides still blame the Greens for being ‘wreckers’) but it is SOMETHING.

Lucky politics just happens in a vacuum and there is never ever any historic context for this stuff, huh?

There are a lot of politicians speaking about ‘social cohesion’ and the need to hold the nation together, which is of course, very worthy and something we should all be working towards. But it also needs to flow ALL ways. And at the moment, as Australia Institute board member and lawyer Josh Bornstein points out, it is not a fair playing field at the moment.

Peter Dutton continues:

I think we can win the next election but there is a lot of hard work between now and then.

We have a Prime Minister who is living in a parallel universe at the moment. The Prime Minister says families have never had it better off because inflation is off but all of the prices are up. For people in the Jewish community and across the country, Australians are watching their Prime Minister, knowing he is out of his depth and he is not up to the task, particularly in relation to law and order and keeping our country safe. The first charge of a Prime Minister is to keep our people safe. The Prime Minister has failed at that basic task. People in Jewish communities are really living in fear at the moment and yet in the Prime Minister’s discussion yesterday with his Caucus, he never mentioned anti-Semitism once, even though it is a national crisis in our country and it is indicative of further problems across society. I want to make sure that we can take the decisions that are required, including minimum mandatory sentencing for people who commit terrorist attacks. I want a clear message to be heard by anybody who has evil in their heart, that we have absolute zero tolerance for anti-Semitism.

Dutton does not speak about any other hate crimes, including Islamophobia, which has also increased, according to the Islamophobia Register Australia. As the Jewish Council of Australia have repeatedly pointed out, only addressing one aspect of hate in Australia does nobody any favours, nor make anyone safer.

Peter Dutton has addressed the joint-party room meeting with the cameras present (which is standard for both major parties for the first sitting day – and for when they feel the need for some extra coverage of the message) and he has laid out the Coalition’s ‘plan’ for the election campaign.

I hope everyone has had a good break because there is a lot of hard work ahead. Thank you to each and every one of you for the hard work you have undertaken in your electorates. We have all heard the message across the country, and it is not the Prime Minister’s message that this is a year of optimism and the people are very happy with where the government is at. It is not that situation at all. There are families who thought 2.5 years ago this was going to be a government for them, a Prime Minister who understood their concerns, it has been anything but that. There are families who are hurting all over the country. There are 27,000 small businesses now who have failed, there has been a 3-fold increase in the number of manufacturing businesses that have closed over the last 2.5 years and it is not getting better. We do know that the government has lost its way. We know the Prime Minister is not up to his task and we know there are many families suffering because of it. Food is up by 12%. Rents are up by 17%. Electricity is up by over 30%. Gas by over 30%. This government has no answers for them. I think there is momentum for change. People do want to get their country back on track and that is what we want to do. With your support we can do that. We have an opportunity to, as John Howard and Peter Costello did, to get into government, to clean up Labor’s mess and make the decisions which are necessary to help families not to hurt them.

Fun fact: even before World War II Australian politicians were hacking the media. The nation’s second prime minister, Alfred Deakin, was found to be the anonymous correspondent who wrote for the London Morning Post, giving an incredibly detailed insight into Australia’s government on the eve of federation. The correspondent was always found to be bang on about what the government planned to do, or the thinking behind certain decisions…because it was being written by the prime minister of the time.

The Parliamentary Library goes into some detail about all of that, here

Parliament doesn’t start until midday on Tuesdays because of the party room meetings – where all the political parties get together and receive a little rah-rah from their leaders, while discussing what will happen in the parliamentary week.

For the government it is what bills will be put forward, while the Coalition and Greens discuss which way they will vote on those bills. There is also the chance for MPs to raise issues or questions. Following the meetings, there is a background briefing held by each of the parties. The meeting’s minutes are read out and then journalists ask if certain issues were discussed or if anyone raised questions. From that background briefing, the journalists then go off and make phone calls to sources about what actually happened in the meeting, or who might have been the ones to raise issues.

It’s a strange little Canberra quirk of making it all off-the-record background and from what I can gather started during World War II when John Curtin would hold off-the-record background briefings with the journalists of major mastheads and broadcast stations on Australia’s involvement in military operations. From there, it became part of the fabric of parliament – and now state parliaments do the same thing.

Former Coalition minister Christopher Pyne is having a great time with his column in the Ninefax papers it seems.

Fresh from saying the quiet part out loud regarding the Peter Dutton’s nuclear ‘policy’ (Pyne effectively said ‘it’s never going to happen, but it’s given the Coalition a great distraction tool – 10/10 politics!’)

Pyne is back today with an ode to imperialism, in which he argues that Greenland should be sold to the United States because…reasons. Pyne, who is now officially a lobbyist with an interest in defence (a popular pathway for former defence industry ministers) thinks imperialism would mean the “56,000 cold but proud residents would see their future much more brightly under the umbrella of the US, rather than remaining with the aloof Danes”. He doesn’t give many reasons other than he thinks it would be a good idea, and it’s been done in the past.

The comments under the op-ed are asking if it’s satire.

Given that the public service is one of the battlegrounds of this election campaign, it might also be worth taking a look at the Services Australia capability review. The Coalition says more staff in the APS doesn’t result in better service (apparently outsourcing those jobs to the private sector for three times the cost is much more effective!) but the capability review found:

“With the support of short-term government funding, the agency recently recruited over 5,100 APS 3 and 4 level staff between November 2023 and March 2024, to address excess demand in the system. The additional resourcing reduced claims on-hand by more than half (from a peak of 1.35 million), and over one million phone calls were answered, reducing call wait times.”

Now, it is not perfect and people are still having issues reaching Services Australia. But will cutting the number of staff help address that? Logic would say…no.

In unsurprising news, ACT senator David Pocock is not a fan of the Coalition’s attacks on the public service:

Given the Coalition are pretty stuck on that ‘36,000 extra public servants’ number, it might be a good time to remind you that in the last year of the Morrison government, the Coalition spent $20.8 BILLION on consultants – which is the equivalent of about 54,000 full-time public servants.

So that’s about a third of the public service in private hands.

For some added context, the most recent data shows there are 185,343 employees in the public service – and that is across service delivery, research, regulation, project management and policy development.

So before the Coalition goes even more wild on the APS, let’s look at federal public servants as a percentage of the working population.

In June 2008 the APS made up 0.75% of the population. In 2012, it was 0.74%. In 2016 that dropped to 0.64%. That dropped further in 2020 to 0.59% (and remember the short fall was made up by contracting the private sector)

So what is it now? In June 2024, APS employees as a percentage of the population made up….0.68%.

Shadow treasurer and the reason Jim Chalmers gets up in the morning, Angus Taylor, is very, very upset at Chalmers using Treasury to rubbish the Coalition’s Snitty and Chips tax write off plan.

He told Sky News:

This is an egregious politicisation of the public service to get the Treasury to do this analysis. It is absolutely at odds, in our view, with the Australian Public Service Code of Conduct. I’ll be writing to Stephen Kennedy today, the Secretary of Treasury, asking for a full explanation as to why he has done this. And it is clear that Labor’s 36,000 additional public servants is at least partly about the politicisation of the public service and using them to attack, in pure political terms, the opposition. This is not what a public service is for. But this is how the public service is being used by a bad Labor government that is more focused on politics than it is on beating the cost of living crisis, the standard of living crisis that has been engineered by this Treasurer who is out of his depth and out of touch. This is a modest tax cut for small businesses where we’re seeing record levels of insolvencies. We have a Treasurer here who has never run a business and he doesn’t want to see any businesses existing in this country.

While north Queensland is flooding, parts of Western Australia and Victoria are burning.

The situation in Victoria’s Grampians National Park is serious, with authorities issuing an Emergency Warning for Mirranatwa

This Emergency Warning is being issued for . 

• There is a bushfire at Grampians National Park – Victoria Range (Bullawin) that is not yet under control. 

That sort of alert means ‘leave immediately’:

What you should do: Travel to: 

• Hamilton Emergency Relief Centre – Hamilton Performing Arts Centre, 113 Brown Street, Hamilton. Open daily from 9:00am to 7:00pm, If you require the relief centre outside of these hours, there is a phone number you can call at the centre and a staff member will be with you promptly. OR
• The home of family or friends that is away from the warning area.
• When you leave remember to take your pets, medications, mobile phone and charger.

In WA, there is a Watch and Act alert in place “for people in an area bounded by Somerville Drive, Robertson Drive, Halifax Drive, South Western Highway, Bunbury Outer Ring Road and Lilydale Drive in parts of DAVENPORT, COLLEGE GROVE, and NORTH BOYANUP in the SHIRE OF CAPEL and CITY OF BUNBURY.”

That has thankfully been downgraded after fire authorities judged the fire which started last night to be no longer a threat (to houses/people)

Back to housing and workplace minister Murray Watt and housing minister Clare O’Neil are reupping last year’s budget announcement that the process for builders to receive their accreditation will be fast tracked. From their release:

As more workers are skilled up, the Albanese Government has made it simpler and quicker for builders to get on with the job. The application process has been streamlined to prioritise builders aiming to work on Housing Australia projects, with greater support and guidance from expert WHS auditors.

…“The changes we made after last year’s Budget have resulted in newly accredited residential builders gaining accreditation in an average of four months, compared to the previous average application period of 12 months,” Minister Watt said.

Given the flood news in Queensland (where a 57 year old flood record looks like being broken in north Queensland) it is probably a good time to remind you of the Australia Institute’s Climate Summit where David Pocock, Craig Foster and Jennifer Robinson are among speakers the speakers:

With the United States pulling out of the Paris climate agreement, experts say Australia’s role in transitioning away from fossil fuels is more important than ever. Next Wednesday several experts and speakers will appear at the Climate Integrity Summit at Parliament House, to talk about how Australia can influence the international context and how the 2025 federal election outcome will shape global climate action. Tickets are sold out – but there is a waitlist! https://australiainstitute.org.au/event/climate_integrity_summit_2025/

Assistant minister to the prime minister Patrick Gorman’s staff are continuing their tradition of long subject lines in their transcript releases, which dictate the vibe of how they’d like you to view the transcript. Today’s:

Subjects: The Albanese Government is back to Parliament for 2025, packing Australia’s lunch box with nutritious policies; Peter Dutton’s ‘lunch tax write-offs for bosses’ policy will cost Australian taxpayers $1.6 billion on their bosses’ long lunches, movie tickets, footy tickets and rounds of golf.

‘Possum’ (his middle name and how he is known in Labor caucus) managed to keep the lunch theme going:

Our government packs the nation’s lunch box full of nutritious policies. Full of nutritious policies like fibre broadband, making sure that you’ve got the fibre you need to get the work done that you need to get done. We make sure we pack the nation’s lunch box for those who are hungry to learn with be Fee-Free TAFE, and we make sure that for those who’ve got a little bit too much HECS debt, that we cut the crusts off. Because we know that we can do more to support families across Australia and support those who want to learn.

And then he stretches it further than a roll up in the hands of a prep student with:

And then – what’s in Peter Dutton’s lunch box? What was his big idea to bring back to Parliament for 2025? We had nine weeks off. Nine weeks, and all that Peter Dutton could find was an absolute stinker of a policy, like a lunch box that had been left in the bottom of a bag since Term 4, 2024. Mr. Dutton’s ‘lunch tax write-offs for bosses’ policy absolutely stinks. Why would you give people tax write-offs for movie tickets, footy tickets, golf games, Wagyu beef? Why is Mr. Dutton’s only idea that he’s had over the last nine weeks to give us an absolute stinker of a policy?

There were no questions, apparently.

For those looking for an update on how the US-Canada trade kerfuffle is going:

Jim Chalmers is wasting no time – he is holding a press conference in the Blue Room of parliament house (the second most fancy press conference location) to talk about the government’s economic plans ahead of the new parliamentary year.

We’ll bring you some of the highlights from that a little later.

AAP reports that US president Donald Trump is planning to speak with China’s president Xi Jinping in the coming days:

US President Donald Trump will speak with Chinese President Xi Jinping within the next couple of days, setting up a major diplomatic exchange as the superpowers seek a deal that could avert a broader trade war.

Trump on Saturday ordered sweeping tariffs on goods from Mexico, Canada and China, as part of demands they stop the flow of illegal fentanyl.

On Monday, Trump threatened to ramp up tariffs on China further, which were set at 10 per cent on goods from that country, along with 25 per cent tariffs on Mexican and most Canadian imports, starting on Tuesday. He later paused the levies on Mexico after the country promised to reinforce its border with the United States.

But those tariffs stopped short of Trump’s campaign promises for vast new tariffs on Chinese goods, and on Monday he described the initial tranche as an “opening salvo.”

“China hopefully is going to stop sending us fentanyl, and if they’re not, the tariffs are going to go substantially higher,” Trump said.

“China will be dealt with,” he added.

Trump also repeated his opposition to Chinese involvement in logistics at the Panama Canal, a major trade crossing in the Americas.

“China’s involved with the Panama Canal. They won’t be for long,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office.

On Monday, China categorically rejected US accusations of its alleged influence over the canal.

“Let me say that I think the accusation against China is totally false,” China’s UN ambassador Fu Cong said in New York.

“Let me emphasise that China has not participated in the management and operation of Panama Canal and has never interfered in canal affairs,” he added.

China respects Panama’s sovereignty over the canal and recognises it as a permanent neutral international gateway, Fu said.

Peter Dutton has also emerged from the church and has spoken about the “very nice” start to the parliamentary year (you may have forgotten, but this version of Dutton is all about ‘nice’, which makes complete sense if you forget about the 24 years Dutton has spent in parliament so far, and everything he has done with power in that time).

Asked if he is ready to ‘lead the country’, Dutton says:

I believe very strongly that there’s a mood for change in our country and I think we’ve demonstrated over the course of the last three years that we have the stability and the depth of experience to make the decisions to keep our country safe and help families recover from a really tough period that many people didn’t predict 2.5 years ago and I fear that it gets worse if the government’s re-elected.

Just a reminder that you won’t actually learn any detail on how the Coalition plans to ‘keep our country safe and help families recover from a really tough period’ until AFTER the election, because Dutton is not releasing any policy detail. Which is apparently just fine and dandy for the alternative prime minister to declare.

Anthony Albanese is then asked a question about protecting places of worship, which was put in the context of the opposition’s claims the government is not doing enough to protect synagogues.

The government has been working with members of the Jewish community and has provided additional funding for security for synagogues and schools.

Albanese is in no mood for this sort of framing this morning it seems and says:

Forget about the Opposition. I’ve been talking about the need to protect places of worship very clearly. I’ve made the Government’s position on that very clear.

We are still some way off from the sitting (the parliament sitting begins at midday today) but the church service where everyone pretends to get along with each other, has concluded.

Anthony Albanese has spoken outside St Christopher’s and said of the service:

‘Hope in an uncertain world was appropriate’. We do need hope and we need optimism and as we begin the parliamentary year, that’s precisely what I have said – optimism for the year ahead and optimism that we can create a better future for Australia, if we seize the opportunities that are before us.

We begin the parliamentary year with inflation falling, wages rising and with unemployment low. The key indicators of the living standards of Australians but we know there is more work to do and in this sitting period, we’ll continue to push forward with cost-of-living relief. We have legislation before the Parliament that will make a difference in the short term, but also in these turbulent seas, we have our eye on the horizon. (New slogan alert)

So measures such as making free TAFE permanent will not only assist with cost of living, but it helps to give Australians the skills and the training that they need and the employers the skilled workforce they need for the jobs of the future. The abolition of the activity test when it comes to childcare – I saw a clip of The Parenthood talking about how it’s a barrier to women seeking employment in the workforce, particularly the most disadvantaged women, entering the workforce and being able to contribute for their families and indeed for their country. Now, this legislation will be important, the 3-day childcare guarantee that we’ll introduce to the Parliament this week as well. So I look forward to continuing to have debate in the great democracy that is Australia, but this morning was a great way to begin the parliamentary year, following on from the very important ceremonies that took place yesterday at the Australian War Memorial, including of course the opening of new parts of that War Memorial, which is such an important site, indeed a sacred site, for Australians to visit as well.

Liberal senator Andrew Bragg, who was one of the masterminds behind the 2019 franking credits/super scare, has turned his attentions to first home ownership over this term of parliament.

One of his answers is to allow first home owners to access their superannuation for their deposit. So far, there are no answers as to how this would help lower the cost of housing – and, if the evidence of the first home owners grant is anything to go by, if suddenly a large group of people have access to a deposit at once and can enter the market, the prices in the market, go UP. Because that is what markets, with little price regulation, do.

Bragg has started this year by focusing on house prices since Labor came to power and in a statement released this morning said:

Nationally, the time needed to save for a first home deposit has increased by 14 months, since Labor came to power.  In three capital cities: Brisbane, Adelaide and Hobart, this time has blown out by more than two years. All under Labor’s watch.  No wonder first home buyers feel abandoned. For many Australians, the dream of home ownership has become a nightmare.  Labor’s policies are failing prospective first home owners —we need to reprioritise first home ownership. 

This of course did not happen in a vacuum. Australia’s housing nightmare has been decades in the making, helped along by an unwillingness to address unfair tax policies like negative gearing.

As the Australia Institute’s economists Greg Jericho and Matt Grudnoff conclude:

There are only two ways to make housing more affordable. Either the supply of housing is increased relative to demand, or you the demand for housing is decreased relative to supply. If a housing affordability policy does not relatively increase supply or decrease demand, then it will not make housing more affordable. The problem with the current housing policy settings is that they incentivise demand but do little to increase supply.

We recommend the following:

• Restrict negative gearing to newly built housing.
• The capital gains tax discount should be scrapped, and capital gains should be taxed
  like other types of income.
• Macroprudential policies should be explored to reduce households access to credit
  for buying residential investment property.
• The government should not pursue policies that preference one group of home
  buyers by allowing them access to more funding.

Someone has just asked us ‘why won’t Peter Dutton release the Coalition’s policy details ahead of the election’ (thank you for writing in – we will come up with comment functionality down the track, but in the mean time, feel free to email me!).

Obviously, we are not privy to Dutton’s thinking. But if I was a Coalition strategist, I would be wanting to fight this election on anything other than Coalition policies. Because there is nothing there. Pull back the curtain and it’s just a man with a smoke machine. And if the election campaign was actually fought on policies, well, the Coalition would have to deal with some difficult questions. Which it isn’t in the mood to do.

So instead, Dutton has set out to establish what ground the election should be fought on – and if you have paid ANY attention to the news cycle over the last 18 months, you would be able to identify pretty quickly what he has come up with (it rhymes with Mulcha Bores). Labor, in trying to avoid culture wars by not engaging or pushing back, have instead sleepwalked into the middle of the arena.

Now, Peter Dutton doesn’t think it will cost as much as Jim Chalmers has laid out and is pointing to the Parliamentary Budget Office for his costings.

The PBO is an independent statutory body which can do the work of Treasury in costing policies for parties (and independents) who are not in government. But while the PBO does great work, it is also bound by the information it is told by the party who has asked for a costing – the policy doesn’t exist, so obviously, it can only use the information it is given to create a costing. Kinda like when my doctor asks how many coffees I have a day and I say “one to two” and then my doctor has to work out why I’m complaining about being jumpy and anxious.

But the main issue is that Dutton is not planning on announcing actual costings, or even policy detail for almost anything – nuclear, migration cuts, government service cuts, how the Coalition would meet it’s climate tartgets – the list goes on, until AFTER the election.

Chalmers says:

If he’s got a costing on this policy, he’s either been unwilling or unable to release. Either he didn’t know how much this policy cost when he announced it or he didn’t want Australians to know how much it cost. We released the costing because we think it’s important that Australians understand the risks to the Budget from what is being proposed in Peter Dutton’s long lunches for bosses policy. And if they’ve got a different costing, they should release it. The costings done by Treasury are very conservative. They’re based on the fact that eligibility businesses would only claim about an eighth of what they’re entitled to. That’s how you get $1.6 billion. If they claim everything they’re entitled to, it would be more than $10 billion a year. It comes back to the choice at the election. Labor is for tax cuts for workers and responsible help for small business. The Liberals are for taxpayer-funded long lunches and entertainment for bosses. They won’t tell us how much it costs. They won’t tell us how they’d prevent it from being rorted. They’ve had all sorts of different things to say about who is eligible and what’s eligible. They weren’t able to clarify that and so we’ve taken the necessary steps to provide more information to the Australian people.

Jim Chalmers is then asked about Peter Dutton’s plan for a long lunch business tax write-off ($20,000 a year, no alcohol, a lot of snitties) which is one of the only policies Dutton has put forward. For some reason, in a housing affordability and climate crisis, we are talking about whether or not businesses should be able to write-off team and client lunches, but hey – that’s Auspol when you let the Coalition set the election ground!

In shocking news, the Business Council of Australia is in support of this policy. Chalmers says:

We found other more responsible ways to support small business, with energy bill relief, with an instant asset write-off to make it easier for them to invest in their own business, help with cybersecurity, competition policy – all these ways we’re responsibly helping small business because we’re big supporters of the sector.

What Peter Dutton is proposing is very different. Peter Dutton wants the workers of Australia to pay for long lunches for bosses and the bill will run to billions. We now know from the Treasury costing that what Peter Dutton is proposing will cost $1.6 billion a year, but could cost more than $10 billion a year. Now, this is why he hasn’t come clean on the costs or what he would cut to pay for his long lunches for bosses policy. That’s because it would absolutely smash the Budget. He hasn’t told us how he’d prevent it being rorted because the Liberal Party is the party of waste and rorts. They’ve learned nothing and the taxpayers of Australia would pay billions of dollars for their irresponsibility.

Asked about Donald Trump’s trade war, and whether or not he’ll end up turning the Eye of Sauron Australia’s way (obviously that is my paraphasing) Jim Chalmers says:

These are big developments out of the US but they are not a big surprise. These changes were flagged in one way or another during the election campaign.

We won’t be immune from escalating trade tensions around the world, but we’re confident that we can navigate these changes coming out of DC. We are well placed. We are well prepared. The main points that we’ve been making to our American counterparts is ours is a very difficult economic relationship that what the Americans have with some of these other countries that have been the focus in recent days. The Americans run a trade surplus with us. They have done since the Truman Administration in 1952, a substantial trade surplus.

Our relationship is mutually beneficial and all the conversations we’ll have with our American counterparts will be about making sure that this really key economic relationship continues to be beneficial to both sides.

Federal treasurer and Queenslander, Jim Chalmers is also asked about the north Queensland flooding.

There is a habit among interviewers and politicians to speak about the “resilience” of Queenslanders when it comes to natural disasters, because, let’s face it, the state is no stranger to Mother Nature’s moods. But there is very rarely talk of ‘what are you doing to stop this” (hint: the answer includes stopping fossil fuel use) even though it should be the ONLY question.

What is often forgotten in the climate back and forth is that we are trying to stop it from getting any worse. The horrific climate disasters we have seen over the last few years – the Black summer bushfires in Australia, the fires and flooding in Europe, the most recent LA fires – that is not going to stop. That’s the new standard, we can’t wind back the clock there. The point of climate action is to stop it getting any worse than what we are ALREADY seeing.

But that’s not asked about enough. So Chalmers is asked what the plan is for communities to recover from these most recent floods. He tells ABC News Breakfast:

It’s true that I think Queenslanders in particular, but right around Australia, people are no strangers to these sorts of natural disasters, unfortunately. They are becoming more frequent.

And that’s why we have tried to reorient funding, not just providing support for response and recovery, which we continue to do, but also investing in mitigation in some of the ways that you’re intimating in your question. There’s been more investment in mitigation. We’re always up for a conversation with the states and territories and local governments about how best we go about that but we have made more money available for that because in addition to responding, making sure people are safe, in addition to investing in communities, helping them recover and rebuild, we also need to make communities more resilient and that’s what we’re doing.

Queensland is experiencing some extreme flooding in its north, with more rain predicted for today, raising fears that those around the Herbert river are about to see the 1967 record for flood levels broken. 57 years ago, the river peaked at 15.2m. It looks like locals could see that record fall, as the waters continue to rise.

That is obviously a terrifying prospect.

Queensland premier David Crisafulli (who grew up in Ingham) told ABC News Breakfast:

I’ve seen images of water in businesses…that never in my wildest dreams thought I’d see water in shops there. Never thought I’d see water in shops there in the high part of town.

I’ve spoken with friends who’ve had homes, businesses friends who’ve had homes, businesses and their farm devastated. It is a really tightknit community. They’ve lost one of their own. Somebody passed away a couple of days ago. passed away a couple of days ago. It’s a really difficult time and they are incredibly resilient people but resilience doesn’t mean they should be left to their own devices. That’s why I’m here and I want to make sure that what we say we’re going to deliver is delivered. going to deliver is delivered.

As it is the first sitting of parliament, there is a bit of ceremonial hoohah to get through before the work of parliament begins.

First up is the traditional Ecumenical church service, where all the MPs gather and hear about peace, love and unity before tearing each other apart in the chambers (if they even make it that long – the tearing apart begins on the church steps usually.

Hello and welcome to the first day of parliament – and the first Australia Institute live blog covering the day’s proceedings.

We will be following along with all the parliament shenanigans as the MPs roll back into Canberra for the faux election campaign. At this stage, all indications are the election will be right on time (as they always are) in early May, which means we have a few sittings to get through.

And while there is some legislation Labor wants to clear off its decks (nature positive laws, anyone?) these next few sittings are all about trying to define the territory the election will be fought on. So far, Labor, in trying to avoid culture wars, has allowed Peter Dutton and the Coalition to set out the battleground and you’ll be shocked to learn, it has nothing to do with actual policy, and everything to do with filling the space with as much noise as possible. There’s not a lot behind that noise (insert angry men yelling at clouds here) but with voters struggling to find a footing in this economy, that anger has some momentum behind it.

Our job is to help you sort through some of that noise and to put the politics into context. You’ll find fact checks and research, and some interesting tidbits here, along with the usual political mess. Oh, and snark. This is after all, still Auspol. We’ll treat it with the respect it deserves. You’ve got Amy Remeikis with you for the day, with the Australia Institute’s formidable brains at your disposal. Thanks for joining us on this first (soft launch) day. We hope you find some value. If you have any thoughts, feel free to hit me up at amy.remeikis@australiainstitute.org.au. Comments and interaction is coming, but for the mean time, let’s see if February is any kinder to us than January.

I have had four coffees (first day nerves!) and the fifth is brewing.

Ready? Let’s get into it.