Parliament Live: Senate estimates gets underway. All the day's events, as it happened.

And on that note, I am going to close off the blog. But don’t worry – we will be back tomorrow, if not bright, certainly early, to bring you day two of the mess.

A very big thank you to Greg Jericho, Bill Browne, Emma Shortis and all the researchers and friends of the blog who send in tips and directions and posts, and no thank yous, as always, to the Coalition who refuse to put me on their list (but there are enough MPs in their ranks who love to have a chat so it all works out *waves*)

And as always, the biggest thank you goes to you, for all you do to keep us going. Truly -thank you. It means a lot.

It’s rough out there, so take care of you Ax

In case you have been away from the socials for the last couple of days, American journalist, lecturer and author Chris Hedges had his forthcoming speech at the National Press Club cancelled.

In the ensuring questions over why (Hedges is writing a book documenting some of the stories of the Gaza genocide and planned to speak on the failure of western journalists to advocate for their Palestinian colleagues in Gaza, which is the deadliest place on earth for a journalist at the moment, with an estimated 278 journalists having been killed by Israel in the past two years) the NPC said Hedges was never actually confirmed to speak.

The Australian Friends of Palestine, which was helping to coordinate Hedges event has just released this statement:

AFOPA is responding to the Statement published on 4 October 2025 by the National Press Club of Australia ( NPC) in relation to their cancellation of Chris Hedges’ confirmed appearance at the National Press Club on 20 October 2025. 

The National Press Club Statement declares that Chris Hedges’ appearance was “ tentatively agreed to”. This is untrue. AFOPA received  written confirmation from the NPC’s Chief Executive on 8 September 2025 as follows:

“I write to confirm arrangements for Chris Hedges to appear at the National Press Club of Australia on 20 October 2025”. 

Furthermore, in an email on 28 September 2025 to AFOPA’s Chairperson in relation to the cancellation, the NPC’s Chief Executive wrote:  “For clarity I am withdrawing our confirmation”.

For the National Press Club to therefore state that Chris Hedges’ appearance was “tentatively agreed to” is as astonishing as it is false. Perhaps the National Press Club needs to include a disclaimer in its written confirmations that a confirmed booking is actually not a confirmed booking! 

The National Press Club’s Statement that the “proposed address was never published on our website” is also untrue. Chris Hedges’ appearance was on the Australia Press Club website( with photo and price of ticket – $95) on 8 September 2025, published by “NPC Coordinator”, at approximately 4pm

The day is getting pretty stupid and we have a very long couple of days ahead of us, so I am going to give you all permission to take an early mark (if you are Victorian, please just google it, we have been through this a few times now)

I’ll keep the blog open just in case (famous last words) but I’ll be turning to other projects – and so should you. Like wall staring. And trying to remember all the words to Favourite Things from the Sound of Music. Both much healthier activities then whatever is happening in the parliament right now.

Meanwhile the crossbench is still trying to get action on gambling ad reform:

Ugh. It truly doesn’t take much to just plunge you right back there, does it.

So what did we learn?

The opposition seems to have learnt one lesson this year following the aged care home packages and wisely have decided to keep the focus on domestic issues. That is a smart strategy – but for it to work, it needs to have a goal. With the home care packages, the goal was to force the government to release more packages, earlier.

With the 000 failure, it is unclear what it thinks the goal is, rather than just highlight that it happened. The aged care focus worked, because the crossbench and Greens were also on board – and they kept it grounded in policy reality, with eyes remaining on the prize of forcing the government to change its own legislation or risk defeat in the senate.

With 000, Helen Haines had a good point about what is being done in the future to stop the risk of a failure during bushfire season, but the opposition appears to have run out of steam on what exactly it wants done.

Also worth noting, given how big a deal Michaelia Cash and others in the right/hawkish faction have been trying to make the ‘Australians return to Australia from Syria’ issue (which the Coalition, with an assist from NewsCorp is calling ‘ISIS brides) is the complete absence of the issue from House question time – one of the few areas Ley has influence over.

Melissa McIntosh is back and wants to know when Anika Wells was personally notified about the 000 failure.

Wells:

The triple-0 outage from Optus occurred on 18th September, on the Thursday. I was made aware by my office Friday afternoon, late Friday afternoon that there had been more than 600 calls impacted and three deaths.

Let’s see how the other star of question time has been going (if you are going to target Wells, you have to have done your homework – in terms of preparation and being across the brief, Wells understands her job and she does the work. Doesn’t make her a perfect minister, but it does make her a fairly safe pair of hands for the government in terms of handling f*ck ups

Let’s see how Operation: You Can’t Sit With Us is going (for all my Millennials – Hastie quit the shadow front bench on October 3, which is International Means Girl day (iykyk) which has elevated him straight to the top of the Means Girl burn book. Icon behaviour really. Regina George would be proud.

Nationals MP Anne Webster asks: Can the minister confirm to the House that neither she nor her office were notified of the catastrophic triple-0 outage that occurred on 18 September before the afternoon of the 19th September?

Anika Wells:

Yes, I can confirm we were not notified of the catastrophic outage until late afternoon of Friday 19th September.

Independent MP Helen Haines asks a question in the same sphere as the opposition, but without the politics, so it actually tackles something that needs to be done:

Multiple inqueries into triple-0 outages recommend temporary roaming during natural disasters and outages. This would keep Australians connected to emergencies no matter who their providers are. Minister, the bushfire season is fast approaching. You said that your telcos have agreed to go faster from the Bean Review. Will you give the telco a deadline to implement disaster roaming?

Anika Wells:

The government accepted and agreed in principle with recommendation 14 of the Bean review that work currently being undertaken by rooming during natural disasters should be followed by work on temporary roaming, though is acknowledged the industry had identified some feasibility issues. It’s drafting a memorandum of understanding to support this development, and let me be clear, it is my expectation that industry will make that work. Subject to the outcomes that have work, my department will examine the extent to which roaming could be available during other outage events in as recommended in the Bean review.

I would also highlight the government’s commitment to the universal outdoor mobile obligation which will allow connectivity across Australia and this will provider in level of redundancy to outages of all kinds.

To the second half of your question, that was absolutely the subject of the Minister for Emergency Services and myself when we met with the three CEOs of our office today. We asked NEMA to attend and they spoke to the particular perils of disaster season, the matters outstanding and we committed to get back together and do a simulation drill in a couple of weeks to stress test where this system is not currently working for people, particularly in places like regional Australia. You would know, of course, the Minister for emergency manage sent is always forward thinking and I will assure you that we are sincere in that work and that work will continue.

Nationals Lyne MP Alison Penfold asks Anika Wells:

How many triple-0 outages have occurred since you became the Minister responsible for communications?

Anika Wells:

If you read the Bean Review, you would read the disturbing fact that until our government acted, Australian telcos were not required to report outages at all. None at all. That’s what happened under you. We have put in place changes which will be further strengthened on 1 November. It will mean telcos must immediately share information relating to outages with relevant emergency service organisations such as police, fire and ambulance.

Back to parliament and Melissa McIntosh (as the shadow minister) gets to ask another question:

I note that just today you are urging Optus to go faster, three weeks after the devastating outage where lives were lost. Minister, why did people have to die before you instructed your department to accelerate the implementation of triple-0 guardian legislation, as recommended by an independent review to your government over 18 months ago?

Anika Wells:

The only thing that could have stopped Optus from having this outage was Optus themselves. They are responsible for their failure and they are held to account for their failure. However, Mr Speaker, the triple-0 custodian would not exist at all were it not for our government. We commissioned the Bean Review, we accepted all of its recommendations including the design and implement the wok of the custodian. It is a complete fabrication to say that the government has sat on this, a complete fabrication. In March 2024, the Bean Review recommended a triple-0 custodian and that further work be done on the specific nature of the custodian. If you read the Bean Review, and I again I encourage you to, it says this can be done in a number of ways. In 2024, the, committee of industry, government to do that work. They met six times between May and October 2024 providing their final report to the department on 28 November 2024. The department considered all of the recommendations and all the issues identified by that committee, which informed its recommendations to the then minister in March 2025, that the custodian should operate within the department and be supported by new legislative powers.

Upon accepting the recommendation, that work began immediately and work began on the legislation that we are introducing now. So, the Albanese government has and will always work to protect Australians and we will hold those who fail to deliver on their obligations to full account.

Over at the Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee again:

Senator David Pocock asks Senator Penny Wong about the Albanese Government’s failure to implement the Murphy Report into gambling reform and inconsistencies in Government disclosures.

He is particularly interested in a surprising link between the Prime Minister and a lobbying organisation.

Australian Parliament Sports Club is a registered lobbying organisation, and lists gambling peak body Responsible Wagering Australia as a client. The story was broken by Daanyal Saeed in Crikey.

Senator Pocock says Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is the president and asks if this is a breach of the ministerial code of conduct.   

Senator Wong says she doesn’t think the club is a lobbying firm as people generally understand it and says Senator Pocock is just trying to get a political grab.

But from my read of Saeed’s story, the Club does seem to sell cash-for-access to gambling and alcohol interests, among others. If anything, that goes beyond mere lobbying.

It’s yet another reason the Australia Institute has recommended requiring all cash-for-access payments to be disclosed. 

Kevin Hogan, the Nationals MP for Page is booted out by Dugald.

The Liberal MP for Lindsay, Melissa McIntosh, who is trying to decide where she sits in party’s Overton scribble at the moment asks Anika Wells:

It has been 565 days since the Bean Review made 18 critical recommendations to government to fix the triple-0 network after the first Optus outage. 18 months on, with a triple-0 crisis, and sadly deaths, why hasn’t the government implemented all the recommendations and will the minister apologise for the government’s delay in acting on these vital recommendations?

Wells:

I invite her to read the Bean Review which has 18 recommendations, 13 of which are now complete, and five which are still in implementation. Of those five, recommendations 3 and 4 pertain to new industry codes in testing of both devices and networks. Recommendation 14 is around temporary outage roaming during natural disasters, and recommendation 15 is a new tribunal assistance of memorandum of understanding. I make these points because the common thread, Mr Speaker is that in each of those four recommendations they are either being led or depend on industry.

So, at my meeting with the chief executives of the three telcos who I summonsed to Canberra earlier today ahead of introducing the triple-0 custodian legislation, I urged industry to go faster on those remaining four recommendations that they have carriage of, and I’m pleased to update the House, Mr Speaker, that they agreed to do so.

One of the good things about this new law is that it creates new levers for the custodian to press industry when they are to get or not with improvement. That is an improvement that will be delivered by the passage of the legislation, with I is why, Mr Speaker, I was very disturbed to hear on Sky News just before question time, after the introduction of legislation, for which the Shadow Minister for Communications was in the House to listen to, that she equivocated on whether the opposition would support the triple-0 custodian bill. This is a shadow minister who is on record criticising me for not going faster when presented with the opportunity to support the bill, dithered and equivocated over whether the opposition would support it. Our role here is to build confidence in the triple-0 system. I have been working as fast as I can to bring this legislation to this place. The question in the legislation, Mr Speaker, is very simple and it should not be difficult for the opposition to answer. The question is: Do you support a stronger custodian for triple-0? If the answer is yes and if you want to be useful, then stop politicising this crisis and support the bill.

Independent MP Andrew Gee gets the next non-government question, which gives us a break from Sussan Ley’s attempts at political relevancy.

Gee:

The rural doctor shortage crisis is a and a shameful indictment. The Charles Sturt University School of Medicine in the Central West of New South Wales is training doctors in the about for practice in the bush, but for half a decade has been restricted by the government to only 37 student places each year across the Commonwealth. This isn’t good enough. When will your government deliver more medical student places to Charles Sturt University so that it can train more country doctors that are so desperately needed.

Mark Butler goes through what the government is doing to open up training places, and then turns to the tenders the government has open for universities to host new medical schools.

There are currently, I think, 100 supported places for medical schools open for tender and Charles Sturt University and other universities are able to apply for that. Obviously it is a competitive process and that will be conducted at arm’s length from myself and from the Education Minister. We have asked in the tender, as I understand it, for universities to indicate a particular focus on general practice because although we want to see doctors more broadly come into the system, we are prioritising an increase in general practice above all things else because we know that a well-functioning general practice scheme is utterly central to a well-functioning health care system. I welcome the question. Obviously I can’t comment on the tender which is open right now, but more doctors, more bulk-billing, more urgent care and even cheaper medicines are the four key pillars of our Strengthening Medicare agenda.

Just a reminder – SingTel the parent company of Optus, earned $8.2bn in total income in 2023-24 and paid $0 tax.

All up since 2020-21 to 2023-24 they earned $32.8bn in income and paid….$0 tax

Sussan Ley is back. She can barely muster up her usual theatrical condensenction, which is how you know she is tired.

After the catastrophic triple 0 outage last month, the minister told a press conference, before her trip to New York, that ‘there had been deaths’. Exactly how many deaths is the minister aware of and has the minister personally phoned each family to apologise for the Albanese Labor government’s inaction?

Anika Wells:

I trust she was watching when the Optus CEO announced news that there had been, as far as he was aware, three deaths, that was late Friday afternoon. The following day, on Saturday afternoon, the Premier Roger Cook said that they had found, within the Ambulance Services of WA, a fourth death that may be connected to the catastrophic Optus outages.

Let us agree here, that is not good enough. What happened in September was not good enough, and legislating a triple-0 custodian will drive real change, but for us here, there is no silver bullet when it comes to corporate failures.

So, have I spoken with the families? I have spoken with Optus, the company who has failed Australians and these families here.

The CEO of Optus has apologised to the families for the failures of Optus and the catastrophic impact that has had on their families, as has the CEO of Singtel, the parent company of Optus. I think we can all agree, it is right and appropriate for these companies to apologise because they are the cause of these catastrophic failures. They have accepted responsibility for this Order, the Leader of the Opposition has asked her question. Frankly, I am disappointed that the Leader of the Opposition seeks to let Optus off the hook and try to say that other people should apologise for the failures of a private company in Optus.

This outage, be and the many failings of Optus, are the fault of Optus alone, and I think the political actions, the politicising of a catastrophe here is letting Optus off the hook, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

Mr Speaker, this is a tragic circumstance. There are family whose have lost the ones they love and that hardens my resolve. Optus is accountable and as the minister, I will hold them to account. The independent regulator has an investigation on foot. We will await her recommendations and Optus, I promise you, will face serious consequences for what they have done.

After that uproar, we get to the questions.

Sussan Ley actually manages to find an issue, but then ruins it by once again playing to her party’s base.

They are never going to love you back, Sussan.

Q: 147 days ago the minister was sworn into her portfolio and she still self-identifies as a new minister. Being new is no excuse. Australians dialling triple-0 in an emergency cannot wait for you to learn. The minister isn’t across her brief and by her own admission, people have died.

Given the magnitude of the crisis, does the minister regret her decision to prioritise a trip to New York over dealing with these urgent matters in Australia?

Anika Wells (who has the biggest vice captain energy in the parliament, which means she is PREPARED for this question time). Wells learnt from Wayne Swan and understands all politics is local – which means she puts in the work to keep a personal face on her politics. So yes, she does get out and do the meetings.

We can all agree that the outages that occurred last month by Optus are completely unacceptable. Optus’ failings are under multiple investigations, including Biak Ma, the independent lator, and by state authorities. No-one should be under any illusion this outage was the fault of Optus and Optus alone and they will be held accountable.

However, Optus’ repeated failure have made one thing very clear: The triple-0 system needs reform tanned that exactly what our government is delivering.

Today we have announced six key points that we are prioritising to make triple-0 the most resilient and the most safe system that it can be.

One, introducing a new bill to enshrine the custodian in law.

Two, introducing real-time reporting of outages to ACMA and emergency services.

Three, forcing telcos to test triple-0 during upgrades and maintenance.

Four, new requirements on providers to fully ensure trips calls for back to other networks.

Five, mandatory improvement plans after trips outages.

And six, within six months of the commencement of the new laws, the custodian, through ACMA, there ensure additional perform mans to telcos to ensure Australians best practice.

With respect to that end of parliament and the Leader of the Opposition’s question, our bipartisan new laws to delay access to social media are one of the most important things that our nation has ever done. And they have the potential to change the world, and that is why these laws were being discussed at the United Nations, and that is why I was at the United Nations. The member would know, if they had met with the bereaved families who have been lobbying for these laws for many years – people like Rob Evans, who was carrying his daughter Liv’s ashes in an urn when he came to this place and begged us to act.

They would know if they spent time with Emma Mason who lost her daughter, Tilley to suicide. Emma is just an ordinary woman, but she has acted with incredible courage. Emma went the to United Nations to appeal to the world’s leaders to take action, as we are taking action. And I do not regret for one minute…(there are very loud interjections here)

…standing with Emma as she took that mission to the world and if we are going to talk apologies, the Leader of the Opposition should apologise for calling that work ‘swanning around’. That is what she said.

I call on the Leader of the Opposition to apologise to those organisations and to the parents around the country seeking us to act.

Anthony Albanese continues, but you get the gist. Sussan Ley then speaks, and ramps it all up to 11 in a domestic political attack.

I wish I could be able to say that Australia did all that it could to help release the hostages and the violence to dismantle the terrorist group Hamas, yet to do so would be a lie. To our great shame, under the leadership of the Albanese Labor government, Australia has not stood with the people of Israel nor with the United States as they have sought to dismantle Hamas and establish the conditions for peace. To our great shame, the Albanese Labor government dragged its feet listing Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organisation. Two years on, we stand apart from our friends in this time of their greatest need. Two years on, Australia has failed to stand firm in the face of terror. Australia has been lauded by Hamas and condemned by Israel and by the United States. Australia could have stood firm and to their great credit millions of Australians have, but those Australians and our Jewish community have been failed by their government. We have allowed hate to take root onto our streets and into our communities….

It goes on, but it is a repeat of the deliberate mistruths and one-eyed politics the Coalition have displayed on this issue. Peter Dutton did the same thing – in fact Dutton could be reading this speech and you wouldn’t notice any differences.

And that’s the point – that is how you know how much pressure Ley is to try and keep her leadership. It won’t work and that’s before you even get to how it won’t win any new votes – and in fact will continue to lose the Coalition support.

It’s a party circling the drain.

There is a condolence motion and an acknowledgement of October 7 before we get into the questions.

Anthony Albanese speaks on Indulgence:

7th October 2023 was a day of pain and terror for Jewish people around the world. When our parliament first gathered in the aftermath, the shock at what Hamas terrorists perpetrated was still raw and growing with each new and devastating detail.

Their attack on a music festival that promoted friends, love and infinite freedom, an event attended by so many young people, underlined a core truth – Hamas stands in opposition to all humanity and all that we value as human beings. Two years on, we remember those who were lost on that day, the largest loss of Jewish life in a single day since the Jewish Holocaust.

Over 1,200 lives taken without mercy. We remember Australian, Galit Kaban who was tragically among them. Galit’s brother, Danny, joins us in the gallery today and I will meet with him tomorrow. I say to him we hold you in our hearts. We also hold in our hearts all who are still being held hostage, those who remain alive and those who tragically, not only had their freedom stolen from them, but their lives as well. We stand with their families and with all those who wait.

We stand with all those who endure loss. We stand with all those who endure hope. All who have had to hold this 2-year vigil which must feel like an eternity. Even now, as President Trump presents us with an opening to peace, we owe it to all of them to never forget what was done.

This morning, the AFR reported that at the Australia-Japan Joint Business Conference in Perth on Monday, Resources Minister Madeleine King “said Australia’s gas exports had helped keep it relevant in regional security discussions and the government would not let any future domestic gas reserve stand in the way of that.” The headline? “Australian gas keeps the peace in Indo-Pacific: King.”

Please. This claim that Australia needs to export gas “because security” isn’t new. The idea that both Australian and regional security rely on the continued or even expanded extraction and supply of gas by multinational companies have been around for quite a while.

It’s both wrong and dangerous.

It suggests that stable security relationships require supplicant trade relationships – doing whatever gas-buying countries want, like Korea and Japan. 

Really, it suggests that if Australia doesn’t do that, the region will become insecure and that Australia might become irrelevant.

Never mind that Japanese companies routinely pay no tax or royalties for Australian gas. Same for US companies. Often, they on-sell this free Australian gas at a profit – see IEEFA estimates that this scored Japanese companies profits of AU$1 billion last year.

The implication here is that if this situation doesn’t continue, security relationships will become unstable and might even collapse.

This argument is a clever attempt at stifling opposition to Australian gas expansion. But again, it’s wrong. Australia and Japan, for example, have longstanding security agreements that have broadened and deepened under the Albanese government.

Both countries see their deepening security ties as critical to stability in the Asia-Pacific, and to managing the role of China. No tension or change in the bilateral trade relationship over one supply line would put this at risk, and any changes could be managed with the most basic diplomacy.

Refuting this “security” argument on its own terms, though, also reveals something even more duplicitous at play.

In this framing, “security” means “stability” – that is, the maintenance of the status quo. “Security” means nothing more than the temporary prevention of inevitable, direct conflict. It has nothing to say about genuine and lasting peace, human flourishing, or ecological security. It has nothing to say about how Australia is making the very real regional security of climate change much worse.

With its approval of Woodside’s North West Shelf gas extension, legislative favours for Santos, and subsidies for American frackers, the Australian government appears to care about the genuine security of Australia and the region just about as much as a sub-imperial petrostate can be expected to. Which is to say, not much at all.

Over at the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislative Committee Senator Steph Hodgins-May asked the Attorney-General’s Department about the lobbying code of conduct, which they are responsible for administering.

Hodgins-May asked how many complaints or possible breaches of the code have been recorded in the last five years.

Reported breaches – around 50. Of those, 14 confirmed breaches – all administrative in nature.

The “most serious” sanction is to deregister a lobbyist for three months, which hasn’t happened in the last five years – and would amount to little more than a slap on the wrist even if it did.

Last year, Senator David Pocock prompted an inquiry into lobbying in Parliament House. The Australia Institute recommended expanding the scope of the lobbyist register and an independent review into possible stronger sanctions for non-compliance.

Hodgins-May also asked Senator Don Farrell if he thinks it’s problematic that ministerial prohibitions on lobbying don’t apply to shadow ministers (she gives the example of Simon Birmingham, who has taken a job at ANZ). Farrell promises to give it more thought, but isn’t at first blush concerned as Birmingham would have been out of government for three years at that point.

OK, now that the ‘Australian’ brigade are losing their minds on the socials after being reminded of citizenship law, let’s head back to the parliament.

It is the downhill slide into QT – so brace yourselves. It is not going to get any more grown up on there.

Right on cue, here is Michaelia Cash (we are not repeating the breathless pearl clutching quotes). What is particularly egregious about this hysteria, is that Cash would never in a million years question Australians who have served in the IOF, which has been credibly accused of committing multiple war crimes and judged by major humanitarian, legal and academic bodies, as well as by the UN to be committing a genocide in Gaza, being able to return to Australia. (Which legally, as citizens, they can).

Cash would most likely also scream outrage at any Australians who have served in the IOF being investigated by Australian or international authorities for alleged war crimes, just as she would accuse anyone of revealing any information about any returning IOF soldiers as putting their lives at risk.

Which is why laws exist. To allow the authorities to carry out any investigations and if necessary, charge people for breaking Australian laws where they will face Australian courts.

In absurd scenes in a Senate Estimates hearing today Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet officials and Minister Penny Wong refused to even confirm if any of the ISIS brides’ cohort have returned to Australia.

After questions by Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, Senator Michaelia Cash, about the
status of the ISIS brides, PM&C officials claimed they were unable to reveal any details due
to privacy concerns.

When asked how many ISIS brides had returned to Australia, PM&C officials also claimed
privacy concerns.

When asked if the Prime Minister knew how many ISIS brides had returned to Australia
Minister Wong took the question on notice.

Given this debate is once again raging (we seem to do this every couple of years as a country) let’s be clear – Australian citizens have the right to return to Australia. There are only very rare cases where citizenship can be stripped, and that is only if the person is a dual citizen – Australia can not leave people stateless.

So even if you call Australian citizens ‘ISIS brides’ they are still citizens. And they have the right to return to Australia, where, if they have broken Australian laws, can be investigated and judged by Australian authorities and courts. Australian citizens have the right to access Australian services and safety nets. They are subject to the same rules as every other Australian citizen.

This is not a left/right issue – it is citizenship law. It’s the constitution, not wishful thinking.

The POWERFUL (it is a rule of journalism that when writing on the intelligence and security committee, you must always remind people it is POWERFUL even thought it is just a committee and can not force the government or parliament to follow its recommendations (as the Morrison government proved on several occasions) but because these people see intelligence documents we all have to remember how POWERFUL they are.) Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security has agreed with the government’s proposal to list Terrorgram as a terrorist organisation.

That makes it a crime to associate or belong to the group.

Terrorgram is considered a Nationalist and Racist Violent Extremist group by security agencies, which makes it the far right of the far right. It uses Telegram (hence the name) to coordinate most of its activities and was listed in June. The PJCIS has ticked off that listing.

It’s a bit different because it is mostly online, but PJCIS chair Raff Ciccone said it met the definition of a terrorist group:

Although the online and decentralised nature of Terrorgram makes it different from other listed terrorist organisations, it is nevertheless an organisation that advocates terrorist acts.”

The Committee reaffirms Parliament’s commitment to protecting Australians from violent extremism and safeguarding the values of our democratic society.”

If you want to know more about how people can fall down these rabbit holes, take a look at Conspiracy Nation by the excellent Cam Wilson and Ariel Bogle.

There is not a lot going on, so let’s take a look at AAP’s finance report:

A sell-off in Australia’s heavyweight financials sector is leading the share market lower, while most other sectors are under selling pressure.

The S&P/ASX200 slipped 37.3 points on Tuesday morning, down 0.42 per cent, to 8,944.1, as the broader All Ordinaries lost 35.4 points, or 0.38 per cent, to 9,244.8.

Nine-of-11 local sectors were trading lower by lunchtime, as consumer-facing plays and real estate stocks also faded.

Inflation warnings from the Reserve Bank and a subsequent reduction in interest rate cut hopes have “rattled” households and dragged consumer confidence to six-month lows in September, according to Westpac’s monthly survey.

“This news, and signs of firmer consumer demand and a pick-up in housing markets, looks to have sparked renewed doubts about the path of interest rates, weighing on near-term expectations for family finances and the economy,” Westpac senior economist Matthew Hassan said.

With the Albanese Government proposing major changes to Freedom of Information (FOI) law last month, there’s been a renewed interest in how the FOI system works (or doesn’t work).

The Australia Institute has new research out today about how the system has become much more expensive, secretive and slow.

But what is the process like for an applicant? 

I made a couple of FOI requests in response to the Government’s claims about the FOI system. 

Yes, these are FOI requests about FOI requests.

Here’s how they have fared, just over one month on. 

Evidence base for Government claims

In his defence of the FOI changes, Health Minister Mark Butler made some remarkable claims:

• The FOI system is “being inundated by anonymous requests”.
• “Many [FOI requests] we’re sure are AI bot-generated requests.”
• “[FOI requests] may be linked to foreign actors, foreign powers, criminal gangs”

AI bots, foreign powers and criminal gangs – it has the makings of a geopolitical thriller.

But extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

FOI: To the Office of the Health Minister

I submitted an FOI request to the Department of Health asking for the evidence on which Minister Butler relied.

I heard back a month later from the Health Minister’s Chief of Staff:

“The Minister’s Office has conducted reasonable searches for documents in scope of your request. … I am satisfied that all reasonable steps have been taken … and that such documents do not exist.”

FOI: To the Attorney-General’s Department

I submitted a very similar FOI request to the Attorney-General’s Department, since they’re the ones responsible for the proposed laws.

The deadline for a department to process an FOI request is 30 days.

29 days after I made my request, I was told the Department “requires further time” as “the work is complex and voluminous”.

But how did my relatively simple request become complex and voluminous?

In short, the Department warned it could merge my request with “a number” of other requests also dealing with the matter of FOI reform:

“We have identified over 2,300 documents as potentially relevant to one or more requests and this has created a voluminous amount of documents to process.”

The Department also explained:

“the area of the department primarily responsible for identifying, reviewing and deciding on the documents’ relevance to the requests continues to be heavily engaged in the FOI reform work which has generated these requests”

In other words, if an issue is timely, the Department is too busy to release information about it.

Another month’s delay would mean the evidence base for the changes goes unscrutinised. As it is, the inquiry looking into the proposed changes have already closed submissions.  

Fortunately, these time extensions now require the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner’s (OAIC) approval. Within a day, the OAIC rejected the Department’s request for an extension. The OAIC criticised the Department for trying to merge the FOI requests:

“Each request needs to be considered on its individual merits.”

Right is on my side. But does it matter? The deadline has passed and the Department hasn’t released the documents.

Reflections

“No such documents” exist to support the Health Minister’s sensational claims about the Freedom of Information system, yet my almost-identical FOI request to the Attorney-General’s Department could have been linked to 2,300 “potentially relevant” documents.

This is one reason why even a modest fee per FOI request can add up: either government agencies truly do not share information or their handling of FOI requests is inconsistent. Either way, you may have to go to many places, and try many forms of words, before you get useful information out of government.

My experience also shows how the government holds all the cards. They say my request is “complex and voluminous”. I don’t have the documents yet, so how can I prove otherwise? And when the independent umpire refuses a time extension, the Department still doesn’t release the documents.

The FOI scheme has become slow and secretive. The Albanese Government’s changes would make it even harder to use.

The 000 bill has been tabled in the parliament.

You can read more about it, here.

Crikey have published this from me – what could be asked at estimates, and probably won’t be.

You can read it, here – and add in your own questions.

OK, the party room meetings are done and the House sitting is about to get underway.

Anthony Albanese has also released a statement on the Fitzroy billboard graffiti:

The terrorist propaganda defacing a Melbourne billboard on the anniversary of the October 7 murders is abhorrent.

The people responsible must face the full force of the law. The AFP will work with Victorian Police to bring them to justice.”

Asked if there will be a climate trigger in the new environment legislation – which means that if emissions from a project are counter to Australia’s emissions reductions commitments the project would have to be rejected, Murray Watt says he think that will be ‘unlikely’.

Sarah Hanson-Young and the Greens negotiated with former Tanya Plibersek to have a climate trigger considered, which ended in the previous environmental laws being shelved by Anthony Albanese.

So now the laws are back and Watt effectively says the abatement response (the so-called safeguard mechanism which allows fossil fuel projects to not just continue emitting, but also increase them if they ‘offset’ enough) will be in place.

Watt says the government won’t be using the word ‘nature positive’ in the name of the bill because he doesn’t think people on the street will understand what it is. Watt also says the government needs to deliver for ‘both business and environment’ and that is what is focusing on. He reiterates that a climate trigger is “very unlikely”.

“It’s not up to you,” Hanson-Young points out (because the bill will come down to the senate negotiations and the Greens want the trigger.

Watt acknowledges that the senate will decide. But if the Coalition decide to negotiate on this, then you’ll know which choice the government is making on these laws.

Murray Watt says that is still under consideration and is being guided by the consultation “and there are a lot of different views on that”. So consultation will continue on that, but it will be mapped out clearly in the forthcoming legislation who has final approval powers – a statutory body, or the minister of the crown elected to respond to community desires.

What are the ‘go zones’ and ‘no go zones’ for where development, which includes fossil fuel projects, for the environment?

That is still to be decided.

Murray Watt talks about the government approving a number of solar farms “in a very short amount of time’ because it is cleared land, under transmission lines, with low environmental impacts, which would be an example of an environmental ‘go zone’.

Is the Beetaloo basin a high or low environmental area? Watt is not sure – he is not sure if it is one of the eight pilot areas which will help decide what is low and high environmental impact.

The Coalition joint party meeting has ended – its off the record briefing will be held at 11.30.

You are going to hear a lot of ‘everything is fine, we are working through our policy processes, robust debate, we are focused on holding the government to account’.

Back in environment estimates, Liberal senator Sarah Henderson is back, and this time she has a booklet, which she reads from. It notes that legal privilege is not a reason to not release information to the senate.

There is a back and forth which goes nowhere (Murray Watt notes that the Coalition used legal privilege all the time as an excuse, he is told it is not a justifiable excuse – isn’t it strange how we just end up trapped in this endless cycle of – but you did it!)

The committee moves on to the nature positive laws. Watt says the government wants to deliver reforms “in the spirit” of the Graeme Samuel reforms, but not necessarily all of them.

Michelle Croker, division head for the department of environment, has been asked why she denied the release of volume one of the incoming government brief.

She says it was related to personal information and legally sensitive information.

Liberal senator Sarah Henderson said she could have redacted the names and it is hard to believe every single page and sentence had legally sensitive information in it.

Can the committee have the legal advice used to hold back the release?

That is also legally sensitive. So no.

Just a reminder – the government is now trying to push through information that will make it EVEN more difficult to have information released under FOI.

What is it that is being hidden?

No one can say. It was an incoming government brief, but everything regarding it, including what was in it, why it hasn’t been released and why it is being blocked, is all being taken on notice.

Over in Environment and Communications estimates, Pauline Hanson has decided to make a menace of herself, grandstanding over why minister Murray Watt was on his phone (it is normal for ministers to be in touch with others outside the room during estimates hearings and the questions were not being directed to him, but senior public servants)

Liberal senator Dean Smith is trying to work out why an entire section of an incoming government brief – the senate has ordered the production of those documents three times, and have been denied. A FOI request has also been denied (it was completely held back, not even redacted).

Watt has taken on notice, the request to have the document released to the committee.

Sussan Ley has released a statement after news stories reporting a billboard in Melbourne had ‘glory to Hamas’ spraypainted on it:

The hateful graffiti sprayed in Fitzroy this morning is deeply disturbing.

Hamas is a listed terrorist organisation in Australia. Supporting them is not free speech, it is a crime. Those responsible must face the full force of the law.

Victorians deserve to feel safe in their own community. The AFP and ASIO should support Victorian Police to track down those behind this disgraceful act and bring them to justice.

Hate has no place on our streets.

The Australian Conservation Foundation has reported “concerned NAB shareholders will today file Australia’s first bank shareholder resolution on deforestation”

The resolution calls on the bank, which is Australia’s biggest agribusiness lender, to:

• Disclose how much it lends to customers involved in deforestation, and set a strategy to stop financing deforestation, in line with global standards.

The shareholder resolution will go to the annual meeting on 12 December and has been led by the Australian Conservation Foundation and co-filed by SIX Invest, Australian Ethical, Melior Investment Management and more than 100 shareholders.

“Our investigations show NAB has the highest exposure to deforestation among Australian banks,” said ACF’s acting CEO Paul Sinclair.
“More than half of Australia’s agricultural land is already degraded, which comes at a $260bn annual cost to the economy, yet Australia remains a global deforestation front, with economy-wide risks banks can no longer ignore.”

ACF’s analysis of 100 land titles of properties where deforestation has occurred shows NAB financed twice as many of these properties as any other bank.

Patrick Gorman is having the best of times this morning:

…We now see a report saying that the Coalition is inching towards a deal to keep the party together on climate change. Well, I think we will wait to see how that plays out, but we know how this story has gone in the past.

And then when it gets to all of the instability at the top rank of the Liberal Party and the National Party, what we are seeing is the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party say, quote, ‘it’s a bit messy.’ That’s Ted O’Brien. Now, when Ted O’Brien, who was the architect of the $600 billion nuclear plan, says that something is, quote, ‘a bit messy,’ you know, you are in serious trouble. We then have an extraordinary revelation from the most secure parts of the Liberal Party headquarters in their campaign review, we have this revelation that Peter Dutton, the former leader, said of Andrew Hastie, the former Shadow Minister for Home Affairs, that Mr. Hastie had, quote, ‘gone on strike.’ Now I am all for Andrew Hastie’s right to disconnect, but what we are seeing here is a report that Mr. Dutton said that Mr. Hastie was absent, scared to do media, or lazy. This is the person who thinks that maybe he would be a better leader of the Liberal Party.

So the revelations about this relationship and relationships in Liberal Party keep coming thick and fast at the moment. We have got Niki Savva writing in The Age today telling us quote, ‘Andrew Hastie’s relationship with Peter Dutton had been on life support for more than 18 months.’ And again, there’s that word ‘lazy.’ Dutton thought he was lazy.

But it does not stop there. In the great newspaper, The West Australian, which I read every morning, we have got a report that Hastie won’t rule out a tilt at the leadership. Andrew Hastie will not rule out a tilt at the leadership, giving great comfort, I am sure, to all of his former shadow frontbench colleagues. Katina Curtis writes in The West Australian quote, ‘Hastie has effectively set himself up as the shadow Opposition Leader.’ Again, great comfort, I am sure, to all in the Liberal Party that this is definitely not over.

But I thought actually, I have got to give the National Party credit for this one. That to have David Littleproud out there saying, quote, ‘needs to do better.’ Now you don’t have to have been in this building particularly long to remember that it was David Littleproud who was trying to blow up the Coalition just a few months ago. To have David Littleproud out saying that the Liberal Party needs to do better tells you everything about how low the standards are in the Coalition right now, what an absolute mess it is behind the scenes, how divided and dysfunctional they are, and how much better the Australian people deserve from this absolute rabble.

If you want to know what the Albanese government wants to concentrate on, on any given day – just take a look at the subject line on Patrick Gorman’s transcripts.

Here is today’s:

The Albanese Government is back in Parliament to deliver for the Australian people; the Prime Minister’s international engagements support Australian jobs; 5% deposits for first home buyers; cuts to student debt; Final Budget Outcome; Sussan Ley has lost two frontbenchers in a month; net zero; Andrew Hastie; Coalition division and dysfunction; the historic defence agreement between Australia and Papua New Guinea.

AAP has an update on the court challenge to the Palestine Action Group protest planned for Sunday:

Jewish leaders want to join a police fight to prevent an anti-Israel protest at an Australian landmark.

The Palestine Action Group is set for a court battle with NSW Police on Tuesday, after applying to hold a rally on Sunday that would start in Sydney’s CBD and finish at the Sydney Opera House forecourt.

The march would come five days after the second anniversary of the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel, mirroring a controversial pro-Palestine rally held at the iconic building just days after the terrorist incident in 2023.

Organisers have said the march is being held to protest Israel’s offensive in Gaza and will mark “two years of genocide”.

The NSW Jewish Board of Deputies and the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ) will ask the Supreme Court to be heard in the case after submitting a brief of evidence challenging the location of the rally.

It is party room meeting day, as well as the start of estimates, which means a whole lot of nothing and then a flurry of nothing.

Grab yourself another coffee and let’s jump in together

You really have to question why the government continues to do this

:

The Greens have also released a statement on the second anniversary of October 7:

On October 7 the Australian Greens mourn those killed on this day two years ago and the hundreds of thousands of people who have been killed since. The Greens continue to call for peace and to end the cycle of violence that both predates and has intensified since October 7. 

The Greens acknowledge the trauma, pain and grief that the whole community has been feeling over the past two years. On this day in particular, we extend our solidarity to the Jewish community impacted by the attacks. 

The attacks on October 7, the killing of civilians and the taking of hostages were condemned by the Greens at the time and continue to be condemned today. After two years, hostages are still held by Hamas. There must be an urgent release of the hostages. These calls cannot be separated from the calls to end the ongoing genocide and occupation in Palestine. 

Peace, non-violence and justice are core values for the Greens, and these values require both a condemnation of the attacks by Hamas and doing all we can to end the genocide in Palestine by the State of Israel – a genocide that is fuelled through a global collusion of countries that supply it with weapons.

Tens of thousands of people have been killed by the Israeli military in Gaza over the past two years. Unlike the brutal attacks by Hamas, the Australian Government is implicated in this genocide through its ties to the Netanyahu Government. That must end. Sanctions on the Israeli leadership and ending the two-way arms trade must happen now. 

The UN’s Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the International Criminal Court’s interim ruling, the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion and numerous statements, resolutions and findings from leading human rights authorities make clear that the Australian Government must act to end the violence. 

The Netanyahu Government has inflicted unjustifiable and disproportionate violence over the past two years on the people of Palestine and the surrounding countries. This must not be forgotten today.

The State of Israel’s occupation of Palestine, the apartheid system in the West Bank, genocide in Gaza and attacks on neighbours are antithetical to peace. So too is hostage taking and violence against civilians.

The Australian Greens were founded on four key pillars, one of which is peace and non-violence. The Greens will apply this pillar universally as all violence is interrelated, all lives are precious and it is the only way to share this one small planet with justice.

A little earlier this morning, Anthony Albanese released a statement commemorating the October 7 attacks:

Asked how she believes the Australian government should respond, Julie Webb-Pullman says:

Well, I think that there’s several breaches of international law that the Australian Government is a signatory to several conventions that the Israeli Government has breached, that they should at the very least be condemning the Israeli government for its breaches of international law, but particularly those relating to Australian citizens.

I think that they should be taking serious action, such as expelling the Israeli ambassador at the very least. Also, imposing sanctions on Israel, as is required by the International Court of Justice decision, which Israel was given time to comply with, and it expired in September, and to which they have still not complied. And also, we should be ending all arms trade with Israel, because these weapons that we are supplying the components for are the ones being used against our sons and daughters on the flotilla and also against the people of Palestine. And our taxes are paying for the weapons that are killing Palestinians in this genocide. So, the Australian Government is making us complicit in genocide, and they should be taking very serious steps to end their complicity and genocide.

Q: We had Richard Marles on earlier saying that they supply non-lethal components to the F-35. What do you make of that?

Webb-Pullman:

That’s a bit of a nonsense. We make the components that enable the bomb doors to open to drop the bombs. Without those parts, no bombs could be dropped from the F-35s. So, that’s a complete fiction. It’s an attempt to side step the very real responsibility that Australia has for these deaths.

Julie Webb-Pullman, the mother of Dr Bianca Webb-Pullman who is being held by Israeli authorities for participating in the legal humanitarian Sumad Flotilla mission says her daughter’s medication was seized by Israeli forces and thrown away in front of her. Webb-Pullman says DFAT have told her that Israel is unable to provide her daughter with her medication (but not much else).

She told the ABC:

It’s been pretty patchy. I have had to make all of the efforts, except for the day on which they did a consular visit, and finally, that’s the only time that they ever did actually contact me. Which was on Saturday. But every other contact has been at my initiation. They do not give updates. I have to ring them every morning. I rang them at 3:30am yesterday morning. They are not very good at all.

As to when Webb-Pullman’s daughter and the other Australians being held by Israel in one of its most notorious prisons may be released, she told the ABC:

I called them just before I came in today. And they said that they are in negotiations at the moment. That they expect and they are hoping that they will be released to Jordan, but they’re negotiating with Jordanian authorities. So that’s what they are expecting is that they will be bussed to Jordan and then flown back.

…we [the families of the detained Australians] have a Whatsapp group that was set up only about a day ago. So it is a very new group. So it’s been only very brief time that we have been in touch. And the other families are worried, because the New Zealanders have all been announced to being released tomorrow – well, today our time. But tomorrow their time, kind of. But they’ve been announced that they are being released. Whereas the Australians haven’t. So people are a bit annoyed that every other person seems to be getting their citizens out. Ireland, there’s US citizens, and many other citizens have been released, but no Australians.

Julie Webb-Pullman said her daughter felt it her duty to try and break Israel’s illegal blockade in Gaza, which is denying citizens of the basics of life:

I was very worried. I was very worried for her on her own account, but also because I worked as a war crimes can investigator in Gaza, and the work that my teams did was instrumental on getting the full investigation into the Palestine Situation opened by the International Criminal Court. And also, we managed to provide a lot of evidence that saw the arrest warrants be issued for Netanyahu and Gallant and the others. So, I was concerned that if she was detained, that she would be treated badly because our name is unusual and it would be quite obvious that she is my daughter. So I felt that that would put her at risk. But she did not want to… that did not deter her.

Independent MPs Kate Chaney, Monique Ryan and Andrew Wilkie and independent senator David Pocock will hold a joint press conference in response to the Four Corners episode last night on the ongoing damage from gambling.

Pocock says it has been 832 days (2.2 years) since the Murphy report into the need for gambling advertisement reform was handed down – and there is still no formal response to the 31 recommendations.

The first of the senate estimates hearings are about to get underway. The Coalition will be focusing on some of its ‘niche’ topics as its priority. What does that include? Australian citizens returning to Australia under strict conditions, because that is how Australian citizenship works under the law (but it sounds a lot more scary when you label it ‘ISIS brides’), whether the National Climate Risk Assessment has been exaggerated (if anything it’s under-estimating the urgency, but since when did facts bother the Coalition when it comes to climate) and ‘controversial’ statements from within the Australian Human Rights Commission (given the definition of controversial according to the Coalition, one assumes it includes comments like – January 26 as Australia Day is a day of mourning for Indigenous Australians and that celebrating it can compound racism – because in 2025, facts are allegedly, ‘controversial’)

You can read more on the impacts of climate change and insurance, here.

And that is before we even get to the climate impact risk assessment report which included 1.5 million Australians may find their homes unable to be lived in, by 2050.

AAP has covered the latest report showing that insurance in this country is going to continue to rise because of climate change (while you can still get it)

A “perfect storm” of more frequent natural disasters, poor planning decisions and high inflation is driving up insurance costs for all Australians, but particularly the nation’s most vulnerable households, a new report warns.

Extreme weather events including floods, storms, bushfires and earthquakes cost Australians around $4.5 billion annually, the research from the Insurance Council shows.

It also warns climate change is making natural disasters more expensive every year.

“The acceleration is undeniable,” the Insurance Catastrophe Resilience Report says.

Council chief executive Andrew Hall said high inflation had pushed up the cost of repairing homes and businesses, making the recovery from major disasters more expensive.

“Australia’s had the perfect storm of insurance challenges,” he told AAP.

He said the impact of extreme weather, particularly flooding, was often concentrated on disadvantaged households.

Remember how I said in the welcome post that the government was really looking forward to the mess of the Coalition? Well, Anthony Albanese gets his first chance to trot out the favoured line:

Oh look, I’ll just continue to watch them fighting each other. I’ll be fighting for your viewers and fighting for Australians.

Anthony Albanese is speaking to the Nine network where he is asked about his upcoming meeting with Donald Trump. Albanese says:

I’ve had really warm discussions with President Trump, and I received a quite lovely letter, I’ve got to say, of invitation to attend the White House. Australia and the United States have such an important relationship. They’re our most important ally.

We have an important economic relationship as well. They’re major investors here in Australia. America enjoys a trade surplus with Australia. Our defence and security relationship is so important through the Aukus agreements. I’ve just been in the UK talking with Prime Minister Starmer and the Defence Minister Healey and others there as well, about how important that is.

When I was in the US at the UN, I was able to engage with President Trump, but also with people like Scott Bessent, the Secretary of the Treasury, as well, about our important economic relationship, security, relationship and people to people relationship as well.

Q: Two years into this deadly conflict, so many people dead, just a tragic loss of life. When will there be greater transparency of our military exports? Particularly in relation to the F-35 program? An ABC investigation published yesterday revealed that detailed information about many parts manufactured in Australia are no longer available online. Why is that?

Richard Marles:

Firstly, there is great transparency in terms of all of our exports that are controlled around the world and there is great transparency in terms of exports in this circumstance. We’ve been really clear we are not exporting weapons to Israel. And have made that clear from the outset and, you know, there’s all sorts of attempts to put information into the public domain but the simple fact is we are not exporting weapons to Israel. We are an F-35 country. We have been participating in the F-35 supply chain for many, many years now. I mean the F-35 program has been going on for more than two decades and, again, all of that is on the public record. But what we do in terms of the F-35 supply chain is supply to the prime contractor which is Lockheed Martin out of the United States. It’s part of our obligation in terms of participating in the F-35 project…

Q: Sorry to interrupt, Richard Marles, we also have human rights and legal commitments alongside our export commitments, don’t we?

Marles:

Of course we do and we maintain all of those commitments and we absolutely have those and we rigorously apply those, but let’s also be clear the F-35 is at the heart of the Royal Australian Air Force. It’s at the heart of our military aviation capability and we’re not going to do anything which jeopardises that. We will maintain all our obligations under humanitarian international law, which we absolutely do. And we also maintain transparency here.

The government has not maintained transparency and DOES export weapon parts. The parts of the F-35 supply chain Australia provides are assembled in America, where the planes are then sold to Israel, and have been used in the non-stop bombing of Gazan civilians. International law doesn’t make exceptions for ‘military aviation capability’ in determining what was, and wasn’t, done to stop a genocide.

That interview continues:

Q: There is a planned demonstration, we understand, at the Opera House this weekend. Does the Government take a view on whether or not that is appropriate?

Richard Marles:

Well, firstly, there are obviously legal proceedings which will play out, and that’s a matter for the courts. I’ll come back to what I said – right now is a moment to commemorate and remember what happened two years ago was an appalling terrorist attack. There’s no ifs and buts about that. Now, a lot has played out in the course of the last two years. Our Government has been very clear about that. We have had front and in terms of our focus the humanitarian situation, the loss of innocent lives, be it Palestinian or Israeli, and that’s where we will continue to be, as we will continue to be in a place of supporting what gives rise to enduring solutions for peace and that’s where the Government is it. But I think we do need to acknowledge that, on this day, the Jewish community in this country is obviously feeling a sense of pain and it’s very important that that’s respected and that there is the appropriate remembrance and commemoration of the events that occurred two years ago on this day.

Q: Australians arrested trying to break Australia’s naval blockade of Gaza say they’ve been physically beaten and mistreated by Israeli authorities. What is the Government’s understanding of what’s happened to these people?

Marles:

Well, look, we’re engaging with Israeli authorities. We’re obviously providing consular assistance to those who are… Who have been involved in this and we will continue to do that. I’m not about to go into it in more detail than that. But we will continue to provide consular assistance to those who are involved. Clearly, you know, we had made it clear that Australians should not be in a position of trying to breach the blockade which exists and that was very much a matter in terms of their own personal safety, but in the circumstances that are now there, we will continue to provide consular assistance to these people

Richard Marles is doing the media round this morning. He is asked about the two year anniversary of the October 7 attacks on the ABC and says:

It’s very difficult to make sense of it. What happened on this day two years ago was the loss of more appalling terrorist and on Israel. And as such, today really can be only one thing, and that is a day of remembrance and commemoration for them and thoughts are very much for their families. Of course, what we’ve seen unfold over the course of the last two years has been absolutely horrific, and we have seen immense suffering. We have seen a significant loss of innocent life in Gaza, and clearly, our thoughts are very much there as well. And it leads us to where we are today, which is that we want to see a ceasefire. We want to see a return of those hostages. We want to see a pathway to an enduring peace in the Middle East, and that really can only come about through the implementation of a two-state solution (which many in the Israeli government have rejected)

Q: As you say, the conflict has affected so many different communities here in Australia. is it your view that today is not the day for separate demonstrations?

Marles:

Oh, today is not a day for demonstrations. Today is a day for remembrance and commemoration. I mean, obviously, this is a very difficult day for the Jewish community in Australia and it is a very solemn day but, in fact, the Jewish community around the world, and the it is utterly appropriate this day that those who lost their lives two years ago are remembered and commemorated in the most solemn way.

Defence consultant and lobbyist (and former prime minister) Scott Morrison has declared Donald Trump deserves the Nobel peace prize if his ‘peace’ plan is agreed to in Gaza.

If you can stomach it, his interview with Sky News is here.

Glenn Connley

Proposed changes to Australia’s Freedom of Information (FOI) laws would make a repeat of the disastrous Robodebt coverup more likely, rather than less, according to new research by The Australia Institute.  

The Royal Commission into Robodebt recommended making cabinet documents easier to access under FOI laws, finding the current system thwarted investigations into the scheme.  

The Prime Minister himself described Robodebt as a “gross betrayal and human tragedy”, yet his government plans to make cabinet documents harder to access.  

This is in direct defiance of the Robodebt Royal Commission’s recommendation to make cabinet documents available for public scrutiny.  

“If cabinet documents had been public, the unlawful and cruel Robodebt scheme could have been exposed and prevented. For that reason, the Robodebt Royal Commission recommended making cabinet documents available under FOI,” said Bill Browne, Director of the Australia Institute’s Democracy & Accountability Program.

“The Albanese government wants to make documents even harder to access, in defiance of the Royal Commission, increasing the risk the next Robodebt will happen in secret.”

“The over-use of the cabinet document exemption and other problems with the FOI system are critical reasons why Robodebt was allowed to continue with impunity for so long,” said Maria O’Sullivan, Associate Professor at Deakin Law School.

“The proposed changes to the FOI Act will actually expand the cabinet exemption even further.”

The new research also reveals that it is government inefficiency, not the number of requests, behind the growing cost of the FOI system.

“Information is to democratic participation as water is to life. People often take water for granted, until it stops flowing,” said Rex Patrick, founder of the Whistleblower Justice Fund.

Key findings

The Albanese Government is lagging on transparency:  

• Fewer FOI decisions are being made than in earlier years: 21,000 last year down from 34,000 in 2017. 
• Only 21% of 2023-24 FOI requests were granted in full compared to 81% in 2006-07 (the last year of the Howard government). 
• In 2023-24 it took 51 hours, on average, to determine one FOI request, up from 13 hours in 2006-07. 
• If the Albanese government achieved the Howard government’s cost-per-FOI-request ratio, taxpayers would save $61 million per year. 

The changes proposed in the Albanese government’s Freedom of Information Amendment Bill 2025 would exacerbate these problems:

• The fee for access would raise less than $500,000, against a scheme that cost $86 million last year.  
• The Robodebt Royal Commission recommended making cabinet documents subject to freedom of information requests. The government’s changes would instead make it even harder to access cabinet-related documents.  
• The power to refuse a request that would take more than 40 hours to process means the less efficient an agency is, the more it could keep secret.  

“Last year, it took over 50 hours to decide a single FOI request, up from 13 hours in 2007,” said Bill Browne.

“In other words, the Albanese government employs four public servants to do what only took one public servant under the Howard government. If the government is serious about improving productivity, it should start with how it runs the FOI system.  

“The Albanese government wants to charge the public for FOI requests, but the fees for a whole year’s worth of FOI requests wouldn’t cover the FOI regulator’s legal fees in a single court case. 

“In the last year of the Howard government, 27,500 FOI requests were granted in full – compared to just 4,500 granted in full last year.” 

Hello and welcome to another parliament sitting – and estimates!

The House will sit as normal and the government plans on using the sitting to forward some of its agenda, including new laws which strengthen the responsibility of being the 000 custodian after the Optus failure led to tragedy.

The FOI legislation the government has foreshadowed, which will make it more expensive (and difficult) to access information will also be advanced, and the government will also be working to show “while we’re fighting for Australians, the Coalition are fighting each other” which is what happens when your entire party is a shit show.

But the shit show that is the opposition is allowing the government to escape having to answer some questions it really should be answering – which is why estimates should be so interesting this week. The crossbench have been working overtime to gather as much information on issues as they can ahead of the senate committees, where the Coalition have so far indicated they are sticking to political point scoring, rather than actual useful information gathering.

Meanwhile in the House, Anthony Albanese will recognise the second anniversary of the October 7 attacks, while warning anti-genocide protesters against holding any protests. Given there are Australians who were aboard the Sumad Flotilla, which Israel illegally intercepted, detaining the crews (international law is pretty clear about international waters) and that all major humanitarian groups, including the UN have ruled Israel’s actions in Gaza a genocide, and its leaders are wanted for war crimes, and a recent poll showed more than half of Australians want to see Russian style sanctions against Israel, it seems tone deaf to be calling for silence. It is possible to mourn the loss of life and acknowledge the horror of October 7, while also acknowledging that ethically, morally and legally there is no justification for what Israel has done in Gaza for the past two years.

We’ll bring you all the day’s events, as they happen. Please feel free to drop us a line, or let us know what is catching your attention, or what you would like to know more about. We’ll have eyes on as many committees as we can, as well as what is happening in the House. It’s a three coffee morning. At least.

Ready?

Let’s jump into it.