Australia Institute Live: Albanese government announces additional health funding, while Trump Gaza plans bring silence – as it happened

Australians are being warned democracy is under stress as trust in politics declines, although it hasn’t reached breaking point, AAP reports:

Fewer than one-in-three people reported having trust in government officials, with the main concerns including the lack of transparency around decision-making, public sector inefficiency and a disconnection between politicians and the community. 

Democratic backsliding across the world has become a norm,” Charles Sturt University deputy vice-chancellor of research Mark Evans said on Wednesday, as he launched his report into Australian democracy at Parliament House.

“We see a picture of a democracy in Australia under stress, but not in crisis,” he said.

There were concerns about “the perceived failure of governments to deliver solutions to pressing issues such as the cost-of-living crisis” as well as political donations and government advertising undermining the fairness of elections. 

Australia needs to breach the trust divide by making the system of government more representative, accountable, collaborative and responsive to the policy needs of citizens,” he said 

There had to be “a stronger focus on integrity in politics, ensuring that governments and politicians deliver tangible policy outcomes for the public”, he said.

“They want to see more collaborative politics, they want to see more cleaner politics,” he said.

Which makes complete sense. You can read some of Bill Browne’s work in that same area, here.

The Jewish Council of Australia has come out with very strong condemnation of Donald Trump’s suggestion the United States will ‘take over’ the Gaza Strip and move Palestinian people elsewhere:

“We furthermore condemn the cynical use of humanitarian language by Trump to justify his egregious plan. This language  adds insult to injury given the mounting evidence collected by human rights organisations about Israel’s gross violations of International Humanitarian Law in its 15-months long attack on the Gaza strip. Palestinians have a right to return and a right to remain in Gaza.“

Dr Max Kaiser, Executive Officer, Jewish Council of Australia, said: 

Donald Trump’s declaration that the United States should ‘take over’ Gaza and ‘own it’ is a plan for ethnic cleansing. This reflects the most extreme and dangerous elements of Israel’s far-right agenda. Forced displacement of Gaza’s population would be a blatant violation of international law and an assault on the fundamental rights of Palestinians.

We unequivocally condemn Trump’s rhetoric and the push to erase Palestinian presence from their homeland. The idea that the US or any other power can claim ownership of Gaza is a grotesque colonial fantasy, one that disregards the suffering of millions and paves the way for further violence.

Palestinians have the right to return to their homes, to rebuild their lives, and to determine their own future. We call on the Australian government to reject this dangerous rhetoric and reaffirm its commitment to international law and Palestinian self-determination.’

Antony Loewenstein, independent journalist, author of The Palestine Laboratory, and Jewish Council of Australia Advisory Committee member, said:

‘The ethnic cleansing of Palestine has been a long-term dream of the Israeli Right and it’s a view shared by many in the Israeli public and Jewish Diaspora. We must stand against the forced removal of Palestinians from Gaza, the West Bank or Israel itself. What Trump and Netanyahu are proposing will not bring Israel security but in fact the opposite; growing global outrage against Jewish supremacy in Palestine dressed up as a humanitarian act.’

More Australian politicians are responding to Donald Trump’s planned illegal invasion and take over of Gaza and the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians who live there – but so far, the major parties are sticking to either silence, or old lines.

We are now in a situation where the president of the United States, who controls a military Australia has agreements with and ADF personnel stationed within, is speaking about using that military to ‘take over’ and ‘own’ another sovereign nation and forcibly resettle the population into surrounding sovereign states or face collapse themselves, like its a real estate deal and not a complete break in international law – and our leaders are silent.

Lidia Thorpe is among those using her platform to fill the silence.

As is former Labor senator and left firebrand, Doug Cameron:

Just on the looming health insurance rise, Greg Jericho has already covered off why private health is such a dud in Australia:

https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/private-health-insurance-is-a-dud-thats-why-a-majority-of-australians-dont-have-it/

Any looming rise in health insurance premiums would be “proportionate”, Mark Butler has said, in this report from AAP – that is in response to fears of a large increase:

Data from comparison business Compare Club has shown a projected rise for 2025 of six per cent, up from previous increases of 3.03 per cent in 2024, and 2.9 per cent in 2023.

Under such an increase, customers would be forced to fork out an extra $369 per year for their policy. Young families could be hit with an increase of up to $248 per year, while retired couples face an average premium of more than $5967 a year. But Health Minister Mark Butler said attempts by health insurers to impose a six per cent rise would be slapped down, after previously rejecting suggestions by companies.

“It is my responsibility as health minister to ensure that any private health insurance premium increase is justified and proportionate,” he said.

“I’ve written to a number of private health insurers and asked them to resubmit a more reasonable figure that is in the best interest for Australian consumers.”

Mr Butler previously wrote to 29 insurers in December calling for an increase in premiums that was more in line with expectations of the community. The letter came after insurers proposed a rise of between five and six per cent, which would be among the largest increases in 10 years.

“Based on the resubmissions the Department of Health received, I am not inclined to currently approve their proposed premium increases,” the health minister said.

Customers are being urged to review their policies to ensure they’re getting the best bang for their buck.

On the Coalition side, it was the Peter Dutton show (with guest appearances from Sussan Ley and Michael Sukkar)where Albanese was repeatedly when he was told of “the planned mass casualty terror attack against Sydney’s Jewish community?”. This is the second QT in a row where Dutton and the Coalition have made this the priority and today they belled the cat on why – it is part of the ongoing narrative to paint Albanese as weak. Dutton claimed, without evidence, that Albanese was not told as police thought he might leak the information.

He presented this as a “fact” despite the lack of evidence or facts to back it up and then, when pushed on the imputation included in his question revealed everything you need to know about Dutton’s political strategy: “if the prime minister claims to have been misrepresented there are avenues available to him at the end of Question Time to make that point. The statement I have made is a statement of fact. It is a statement of fact”. But based on what? Everything is a contest to Dutton, where his pronouncements are ‘facts’ but actual facts are dismissed as partisan.

Once again, Labor focused all their dixers on cost of living and recent policy announcements; the $1.7bn in additional health funding announced today, the child care fast tracked changes, as well as energy and education. Who Labor chose to ask the questions was also informative, given how close we are to the next election.

Lingiari MP Marion Scrymgour was given an early, and prominent question for the second day in a row which shows you how worried Labor is about holding the seat. Labor’s vote in the NT has not recovered from the lashing Labor received in the territory election, where independents also gained a foothold in the Country Liberal Party tsunami to power.

Sally Sitou was also prominent because Reid is one of the seats Labor will also be defending. These little things, at this point of the election cycle matter. It is a way the party can show their MPs have influence and why we don’t pay attention to dixers, MPs can cut them up for their socials and use it to show that they are representing the community. Same with Tracey Roberts, the member for Pearce. Keep an eye on who pops up for the rest of this sitting.

Thankfully, Anthony Albanese calls time on question time, with an announcement he is going to be asked questions by budding journalists for Behind the News. He invites “Dennis” up in the press gallery to come and watch it, which can only be the Australian’s political editor Dennis Shanahan and truly, I do not know what the young journalists would have done to Albanese to deserve such treatment.

The Greens MP for Ryan, Elizabeth Watson-Brown (who is facing a challenge from both Labor and the Liberals to hold on to her seat and will need to finish ahead of Labor to have any chance to win (Watson-Brown won from third at the last election in a fun example of three cornered contests) asks the next independent question:

“Gambling reform is unfinished business in this parliament and parents are angry their kids are bombarded with gambling ads online and when they watch sports and other shows. After three years, your government has still refused to ban gambling ads. Will you accept the Greens compromise offer to ban gambling ads online that target our kid and during sport when families are watching?”

It is not going to surprise you that Labor use this question as an opportunity to attack Watson-Brown and the Greens in general. There are two sure-fire ways to judge an election is close – the shelve index skyrockets (the amount of legislation a government shelves from its agenda) and attacks against the Greens become more common than Teslas on Canberra roads.

Michelle Rowland focuses on the Greens receiving donations from a high roller gambler, which would maybe be a stronger attack if the Greens weren’t arguing to have gambling advertising reform made a priority. I mean, the Greens aren’t arguing for easier ways to gamble here?

Michael Sukkar then asks the same question Peter Dutton and Sussan Ley have been asking all question time. That sound you hear is my eye twitch taking over my brain.

Sukkar:

When was the Prime Minister first informed of the planned mass casualty terror attack against Sydney’s Jewish community?

Anthony Albanese:

“As I said before, it sounds pretty similar to previous questions. You can be – before the Australian Federal Police, ASIO and our security intelligence agencies in peopling people safe or you can be for playing politics.”

There is a point of order on relevance. We are 17 seconds in. Good Dolly.

Albanese continues:

“I was asked a question about the police and agencies and I was speaking about the police and agencies. I am for them. We on this side are for them. Simple as that. We have confidence in them to do their work and we will back them in doing their job. That is what we will do. Continuing to engage information that is made public, they make decisions about, for example, on the day of the Maroubra child care incident, the AFP made it clear that it was their view that people were being paid to engage in some of this anti-Semitic actions. If people are being paid, who are criminals, maybe it’s a good idea to use intelligence to find out who is paying them. Maybe that’s the priority, not this political game-playing.

Those opposite, on a day in which we have announced $1.7 billion of additional health funding, they can’t ask any questions about health. They can’t ask any questions about education or TAFE, on a day in which the parliament has passed free TAFE. They can’t ask any questions about cost of living, even though they say that’s the number one priority because the only policy they have is free lunches. That is why they’re reduced to criticising and undermining the work of our police and our security agencies.”

Peter Dutton is still stuck on this question of when Anthony Albanese was told about the police investigation, because it is apparently the number one issue on the minds of every Australian right now (yes, I know – he is trying to add to the narrative he is painting that Albanese is ‘weak’ and there will be plenty of people in News Corp happy to run this line, but the idea that this is something Australians actually care about is a joke)

Dutton:

“Will the Prime Minister be honest with the Australian people and advise why he didn’t receive a briefing for at least 7 days after the New South Wales Premier had been advised of the alleged planned terrorist attack in New South Wales?”

Albanese:

“There are a range of assertions in that question, that the Leader of the Opposition chooses to raise because that is the point – just to play politics. Not to try to find and hunt down the perpetrators, not to make sure that the perpetrators are held to account, not to find out who is behind the front people, not to discuss or get a briefing of intelligence. I stand with the AFP and ASIO and the ASD and all those who are working so hard to hold these people to account and to ensure that those are the perpetrators themselves or behind anti-Semitic attacks are held to account, arrested, charged and put in the clink. That is my priority. The Opposition Leader is showing what his priority is here today and it is all wrong.”

Anthony Albanese immediately points to when Peter Dutton was rebuked by the parliamentary intelligence and security committee for referencing confidential information in the parliament when he was in government.

Michael Sukkar uses his favourite point of order to say if Albanese is not going to answer the question he can “sit down” which was also Paul Fletcher’s favourite point of order, but Fletcher was always very angry when he spat out that final demand, in what we can only assume is a hangover from being Sydney University debate team pilled.

Albanese returns to his answer:

There are two choices you can make here. One – to prioritise getting to the bottom of what is happening here, supporting the police and intelligence agencies, or you can choose to play politics and play these games.

That is precisely what you are doing. No asking for a briefing of the security agencies, when I offer a briefing of the security agencies to others, no taking up of that, indeed an objection to a point of order to that as well.

[Albanese goes through the figures for operation Avalite but I miss one and don’t want to misreport]

That is the hard work that is conducted by our police and security and intelligence services. The idea that that is not the priority and that that should be not my focus is quite frankly absurd. Absurd and irresponsible.There are others on that side who know how irresponsible it is.

Peter Dutton is now getting to the crux of why the Coalition has spent the better part of two question times asking the prime minister when he was told by police of their investigation into the caravan of explosives police say was to be used against the Sydney Jewish community.

Dutton asks:

“Premier Minns’ was open and honest with the people of NSW when he briefly provided confidence to the public in declaring what date he had been advised of the planned terrorist attack by this unknown organisation or people or individuals. The Prime Minister has been embarrassed because he was not advised by the police because they were worried about him leaking the information ahead of any action by the police….“

Tony Burke is IMMEDIATELY on his feet calling for the imputation to be withdrawn. Dutton argues it is “a fact” and Albanese can say if he was misrepresented at the end of question time. Burke pushes again, so does Dutton and Milton Dick rules that Dutton re-ask the question without the imputation.

Dutton is “happy to assist”

“Premier Chris Minns was open and honest and transparent with the people of NSW when he declared that on the 20 January he was advised by NSW police about the planned terrorist attack. The prime minister has been asked on multiple occasions to be honest, open and straightforward with the Australian public as to why he was notified. The prime minister has previously advised dates he was notified of serious events by the AFP. Why can he not be honest with the Australian people?“

Photographer-at-large Mike Bowers seems to be having fun playing with shadows in question time:

Or at least more fun than anyone else could be having.

Taking a moment out from the very important and life altering discussion of ‘what is allowed in a compare and contrast’ dixer answer that is currently dominating the House chamber, to alert you to this statement from the US Centre for International Policy on Trump’s illegal Gaza plan:

Independent MP Indi Helen Haines has the first of the crossbench question and it is on the switchover from the 3G network leaving her constituents with worse coverage.

“Since it shutdown, my constituents have serious worse connectivity, completely losing the ability to make calls in some areas and have been told to spend their own money on aftermarket antennas. Will the minister recognise some people are worse off after the 3G shutdown and what will the government do to fix it?“

This is a perfect example of how the crossbench use question time to have actual questions which matter to their constituents answered. Which is what QT is supposed to be about.

Communications minister Michelle Rowland says she has requested weekly reports from the carriers on the switch over:

“I completely acknowledge the members concerned. It is very real and on 17 December I convened industry regulators, the mobile carriers, consumer groups to look at the lessons learned from this 3G switchover and I can give her some insights into what doing following up.

The government has stressed to the carriers that the benefits of the 3G switchover really need to be demonstrated and while it is a fact of physics the switchover is completed, there needs to be focus now on the consumer welfare and the member is right, it is true that there are multiple complaints from customers, particularly in regional areas, who have seen gratuitous coverage diminish and who have seen their services overall being challenged.

The question is how can I be improved? I’m happy to inform the member that while obviously it is concerning to hear those reports happening in regional areas, I am monitoring this very closely. I’ve made it clear to service providers the expectation that the 3G switchover will deliver on these benefits. The ACMA and the ACCC have both been highlighted in this, not only in terms of the technical requirements but also the representations that have been made to customers about coverage pre and post switchover. As many consumers will know, those coverage maps don’t always match what they actually received.”

Anthony Albanese is actually showing some spine here and is essentially saying that the Coalition is deliberately not receiving a security briefing on this AFP investigation because then it would all the information and probably couldn’t politicise it. (But he says it in much more political terms)

Albanese:

“I would have thought on this issue, it is pretty handy to find out the facts, it is pretty handy to get a response because the issue here – you know what the Australian people want to know – they want to know who is behind this. They want to know who is engaged in anti-Semitic attacks. They want to know who, if people have been paid, they want to know where that trail leads. They want intelligence agencies to be able to do that work without political interference and without political games. That is what they want here. The priority of those opposite is to play political games.

I engage regularly with leaders in the Jewish community and what they are interested in, is keeping their community safe and you know what, that is what my priority is too.

The way you keep them safe is by having confidence in our national security agencies, making sure that they can engage in the sort of intelligence, if you look at the people who have been in custody, if you then look for what is behind that? Surely, the idea that that is where it stops is quite frankly not the case. The police have continued to be responsible for what is made public and I will let them to do their job and you know what, I will back them doing it, unlike those opposite who just want to play politics”.

Oh good. Sussan Ley has the second question.

It is the same question as the one before.

“When was the Prime Minister first informed of the planned mass casualty terror attack against Sydney’s Jewish community?’

Anthony Albanese:

“I refer to my previous answer. I note the characterisation of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. I am happy to provide a brief through the security agencies if requested by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition…If the Leader of the Opposition hasn’t got one but we are happy to provide that and then the shadow minister might be better informed.

The priority here is not the playing of political games, the priority…“

Michael Sukkar, as manager of opposition business has a point of order:

“The Prime Minister is avoiding answering the question. If he doesn’t want to be relevant to the question, he can sit down.”

Milton Dick is using his most patient voice here when he says:

“We are just going it deal with this issue of relevance quickly. The Prime Minister, if I think anyone was listening, would understand – I know the Deputy would like a date, a time. I want to bring her to the page of practice of 567 about the interpretation of relevance, which has been by all speakers very wide. This was a short question. It was a specific question but the standing orders provides the Prime Minister to speak on the policy topic, if he was to start talking about, for example, climate change, or another topic, I would bring him back to order but when he is giving specific information advice and I know it is not the answer that you want but I do not have the powers under the standing order to direct the Prime Minister to give you the answer you wish.”

Peter Dutton is not happy with Dick’s ruling and wants to know if the prime minister can speak about other issues, that are related, but not directly related to the question the Coalition wants answered.

Dick again uses his very patient voice to say as long as the PM is remaining “directly relevant to the topic” he is in order.

Anthony Albanese stands up, and Dutton seems to sledge him, which is not picked up by the microphones, but Albanese says:

“He is only happy when he’s angry”.

Chris Bowen pops up: “Give us a smile, Pete. Give us a smile” and is warned by the speaker.

It is, I regret to inform you, going to be one of those QTs.

Peter Dutton opens up the Coalition’s questions with:

“When did the Prime Minister first become aware of the planned mass casualty terror attack against Sydney’s Jewish community?“

Anthony Albanese:

“I thank the member for his question and I have said that the government has two priorities, the first is keeping Australians safe, the second is making sure that the ongoing investigation, which is ongoing, prioritises not just capturing those people who have been involved and there are at least two people who are in custody publicly but in order to ascertain who is behind this, it is absolutely critical that the AFP, that the state police agencies, the ASIO and the intelligence agencies be allowed to do their work!

And the Federal Government will provide every support for them.”

Dutton has some feelings about this and goes to stand on a point of order, but Albanese has concluded his answer and the chamber moves on.

Anthony Albanese then uses indulgence (a statement outside of the standing orders, made with the indulgence of the chamber) to give an update on the Queensland floods:

I want to, on behalf of the House express our sincere condolences at the second loss of life that we have seen in this floods, an 82-year-old woman who was found outside Ingham and we express our condolences to her family and her friends in their bereavement.

The ADF now has the four additional choppers available there providing assistance and that goes with the other emergency services personnel who are working closely with the Queensland Government. Senator [Jenny] McAllister remains there as the Minister for Emergency Management and we continue to provide whatever support is requested to Queensland but, once again, we are seeing at the worst of times, the best of the Australian character and I pay tribute to all those who have provided this assistance on the ground at what is a very difficult time.

Peter Dutton does the same thing:

On behalf of the Coalition, I extend our condolences to the family and friends of the lady who has passed away, lost her life in this tragedy. It compounds the grief for the Ingham community and I thank the Prime Minister for the advice in relation to the assets deployed by the Australian Defence Force and the comfort that comes from seeing those uniforms on the ground at a time of natural disaster will be of some comfort to people in the Townsville and greater region that has been effected by the flood and we hope waters recede and people can get back into a normal way of life at some point.

For many families that will take many years and there is a lot of heartache ahead and I praise the Premier of Queensland David Crisafulli for the swift response and the work that the government have done along with the Police Minister Dan Purdy and those in their darkest hours.

There is of course, no mention of the major thing needed – stopping fossil fuels.

We are into the second question time of the year and the chamber seems slightly more rowdy and alive than whatever yesterday was.

But that mood is quickly calmed by the condolence motion for Anthony John Messner, a former Liberal minister and senator for South Australia, in the Fraser government.

The house will hear the condolence motion before any questions get underway.

Meanwhile, we knew this was happening, but the Albanese government has officially moved to discharge its nature positive laws from the senate notice paper (which means the government has given up on having them passed and so is shelving them).

The government could have worked with the Greens, but doesn’t want to, mostly because WA and other mining interests were gearing up to run anti-Labor campaigns at the coming election and Labor is trying to hold on to what it can in WA (where so far, its vote is holding up ok, unlike the rest of the country where the mood is slipping – but not, it should be made clear, into what the vibe was when Morrison was turfed. Albanese isn’t popular, but he isn’t hated and Dutton is seen as kinda meh as well, so mostly people are fed up with major party politicians.)

The Coalition don’t want to work with the government, because it suits the Coalition not to work on these issues, even though Liberal senator Jane Hume was on radio this morning talking about how 95% of legislation is passed with bipartisan support.

So the government is officially shelving the legislation. Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young has responded:

“The Labor Party has abandoned the environment and sent a message to voters everywhere that they cannot be trusted to protect nature.

“What a shocking lack of leadership from the Albanese Government. Last week, these bills were listed on the draft Senate schedule but just days later it is again clear that it’s the mining lobby and the likes of Gina Rinehart who are calling the shots on what happens in this parliament. 

“This is a stunning capitulation to vested interests in the mining and logging lobby. Rather than work with the Greens to get an outcome to protect our environment and end native forest logging, the Prime Minister is letting the fossil fuel and logging lobby dictate Labor’s policy.

“Labor is now on a unity ticket with the environment-wrecking Liberal Party.

“This is not just a broken promise by the Albanese Labor Government, it sounds the death knell for our iconic koalas, native forests and the climate.

“The PM has bulldozed his own environment policy, leaving Labor with nothing to show but three years of broken promises. “

Well. That hour was quite the year.

We are now just under 15 minutes from the next question time, which is sure to take whatever it remaining of our sanity/will to live. Go grab what you need to get through it, while we mentally prepare for what’s coming.

Go on without us. Save yourselves.

Anthony Albanese appears frustrated that the health funding announcement is being overshadowed by what is a major change in geopolitical relations and the end of the international rule of law. What Donald Trump is planning is illegal. No question. It is an invasion of a sovereign territory and the ethnic cleansing (by force if necessary, by an allied military Australia has embedded ADF personnel with, as well as ongoing strategic security arrangements) of the Palestinians. So sorry if people want reassurance the Australian government has some sort of plan here?

Albanese:

“My job is to give Australia’s position. And Australia’s position is to support a bipartisan position – one where Israelis and Palestinians can live in peace and security.“

He takes one last question, which amounts to the same as the last few questions he has not answered on this – that what Donald Trump has said he will have the United States do is not just business as usual, but a complete break from a position most of the world has supported for decades, in favour of an invasion.

Albanese responds:

“What I’ve said is we will be consistent, as we are. I’ve also said that I’m not going to, as Australia’s Prime Minister, give a daily commentary on statements by the US President. My job is to support Australia’s position.

My job here today – I’ll tell you what Australians will be concerned about* – they’re concerned about Medicare, they’re concerned about education, they’re concerned about whether they have access to free TAFE, the debate that we’ve just had. I’ll continue to engage in that.

We will, of course – what we do is we take our considered positions when matters of international affairs are raised, and we do so in a manner that is consistent with Australia’s values.

And I can’t be stronger than saying what Australia’s bipartisan position has been for a long period of time across multiple governments, across many decades.

And of course, the United Nations – when Australia played, historically, a very important role in the creation of the state of Israel – it’s something that we and the Labor Party and my government and other governments consistently, since then, have supported. But those governments have also supported what happened then, which was the creation of two states – not just one – and that remains my position, and it has been a bipartisan position up to this point.”

*Pretty sure most Australians can walk and chew gum, in that they can care about their public health system AND what Donald Trump may be dragging the world into at the same time.

Anthony Albanese will not move from his original statement – that he won’t run a commentary on Donald Trump’s statements, and Australia still supports a two-state solution.

It is pointed out by Mark Riley at the Seven Network that Albanese has previously criticised ‘land grabs’ by other nations such as China and Russia as well as the relationship between the US and Australian defence forces. Albanese doesn’t budge.

“I’m not going to have a running commentary on statements by the President of the United States. I’ve made that very clear.

…When it comes to our position on Gaza, we have not received any request regarding the rebuilding of Gaza. What we have said, though – clearly, we’ve supported a ceasefire. We’ve supported hostages being released. And we’ve supported aid getting into Gaza. There is a need to do that, and Australia is willing to assist getting aid into Gaza to provide that support. We have done so. That is consistent with what Australian governments have always done, which is to provide support.

Anthony Albanese is asked about Donald Trump’s (illegal) plans for Gaza and says:

“I’ve said before that I don’t intend to have a running commentary on the President of the United States’ statements.…What I would say is that Australia’s position is the same as it was this morning, as it was last year and it was 10 years ago and it was under the Howard government.

The Australian government support, on a bipartisan basis, a 2-state solution in the Middle East.

With his threat to “take over” the Gaza strip this morning, Donald Trump – with an all too willing accomplice in Benjamin Netanyahu – has finally broken what was left of the international rule of law. 

For Australia, this means that the values that supposedly underpin our Alliance with the United States are also gone. Trump has thrown them out, as he always said he would. 

It is in Australia’s interests to stand up for the international rule of law, in Gaza and elsewhere. It is in our interests to stand up for our values, and to use this as the basis of a renewed conversation with the US.

We should never be complicit in Trump’s violent imperialism. The international rule of law matters to us, because without it, the world – already a dangerous place – will be a lot less safe for everyone.

When the NDIS reforms were going through, part of the agreement was that the states and territories would take on some of the foundational supports within the NDIS, in exchange for more health funding.

This agreement for an additional $1.7bn (over one year) is happening ahead of any agreement on foundational supports.

Health minister Mark Butler said:

“The Prime Minister’s right – the Commonwealth’s very satisfied with progress on NDIS rule reform and also the development of foundational supports. But states and territories understand that the conclusion of a 5-year deal – which is what they’re after and what was committed by the Prime Minister at the National Cabinet meeting in December 2023 – remains tied to that NDIS reform process continuing as it would. This is a 1-year rollover. It does not deliver exactly what the states would have got in the first year of a 5-year agreement. The negotiation of the 5-year agreement continues between jurisdictions and remains tied to positive progress on NDIS reform.“

The prime minister’s press conference has been called to announce a new funding agreement the Albanese government has struck with the states and territories which will mean another $1.7bn in health funding.

The official release says:

The Albanese Labor Government is building Australia’s future and strengthening Medicare, delivering an additional $1.7billion to fund public hospitals and health services next year.

This is in stark contrast to Peter Dutton, who was voted Australia’s worst Health Minister by Australia’s doctors and cut more than $50 billion from public hospitals.

Under a new Agreement between the Albanese Government and all state and territory governments, the total Commonwealth contribution to state-run public hospitals will increase by 12 per cent to reach a record $33.91 billion in 2025-26.

This funding will be delivered to states and territories, to help cut waiting lists, reducing waiting times in emergency rooms and managing ramping.

* Estimate based on Commonwealth share of estimated hospital activity in 2025-26, including expected growth under the one-year extension to the NHRA. Sum of states and territories may not equal national figure due to rounding.

Is there any one issue which would decide who Zoe Daniel would support in a minority government situation?

Daniel:

“I don’t think any one thing is going to tip me. The world is a lot more complicated than that. I would say that the Coalition also jumped on the idea of a partial ban after myself and particularly Kate Chaney were jumping up and down about this and while the Murphy report was under way or in train. And so I see a potential discussion with them about whether they are prepared to go further on that. But I think when you are considering that really complex question of what is the actual will of the people? If it’s that tight, what do people want the outcome to be? Or do they want to leave them?

How can I contribute to being a part of that if it comes to it? And then there would have to be a series of issues. It won’t be any one thing.

Asked which major party she would support if both major parties came within spitting distance of leading a minority government, Zoe Daniel says:

“So, with apologies to the ABC lunchtime audience*, but I’m with a particular focus group – “Shit and Shitter”. I’m also in the polling booth and I’ve thought, “Who am I going to vote for? Because neither of these are really representing me.” And that will potentially translate to having to make a balance-of-power decision. So the really honest answer is – I’m still working through my thinking on that.“

*Daniel apologised to the ABC audience as the ABC broadcasts the Wednesday national press club address.

Goldstein independent MP Zoe Daniel is asked if the teal crossbench would work together in the event of a hung parliament and says:

“I think it’s good to put a set of priorities on the table and others will have different ones. I don’t think it would be any real surprise across the chamber that that is the range of priorities that I am flagging because these are the kinds of things I talk about all the time. I think the initial pillars of the 2022 election still stand because a lot of them haven’t actually changed much. Neither of the major parties have a 2035 climate target, economic policy is very vague, I don’t see any particular gender equality policy positioning from the Coalition specifically and I think the umbrella issue of integrity in politics and trust is still one of the driving issues or within the electorate. As to what the nature of these negotiations might be, I don’t know. With some distance out from the election, this is one of the reasons to have this conversation today and to put some of those priority areas out there. And to try to provoke the conversation potentially over the next couple of months.“

While we wait for the prime minister to respond, I can bring you what Greens leader Adam Bandt has said about Trump following his announcements he plans on ethnically cleansing the Gaza strip and have the US ‘own’ the sovereign territory (both illegal under international law, in case it needs stating).

Bandt:

“The Greens said, when Donald Trump was elected, that Donald Trump be a threat to peace and turning democracy and tragically this recent announcement that we’ve seen today in this further proof of this. This is wrong. This is the end of international law. This is Donald Trump talking about the takeover of another country, potentially by force. The Australian Government must make that it opposes a clear violation of international law. Whatever one thinks about the situation in the conflict in the Middle East, this is clearly wrong. Australia also unfortunately has a very poor record in the past of simply following the United States into conflict. The Australian Government must make it clear that it opposes this recent announcement from Donald Trump, and also that it will play no part in this matter.“

Anthony Albanese has announced a press conference which will be held in the next couple of minutes.

It will be the first opportunity to ask him about the response to Trump’s declaration on Gaza.

We’ll cover more of Zoe Daniel in the question and answer section of her address but this is the vibe of the speech so far:

“With an election imminent, as a nation and as a community we have a choice – not the uninspiring red tie/blue tie choice we are presented with almost every day, but a moment of real truth.

For decades, Australians have been told a lie that has shaped our politics, our media, and our expectations of government. We have been told that only the major parties can govern, that they and only they can solve the problems we face, but as I ask my constituents, when I go doorknocking around my electorate of Goldstein, let me ask you in this room, do you feel like they have been solving them?

Is the tax system fair? Is housing more available and affordable? Has climate action been strong enough? Are women safer? Is life getting easier for families? I can tell you the answer is almost always no.

….At this election we come to a fork in the road. One way is to continue with the same old, same old of politics as usual, swapping between two sides that promise change but reliably deliver disappointment. The other – a parliament that truly reflects what people really need and care about. A way that uses hope, aspiration, and problem-solving over fear and negativity – or a pathological lack of ambition. A way that finds an uncommon and welcome middle path in an increasingly polarised and angry left and right world.

A way that will permanently change the direction of politics in Australia. A way to the era of independents.”

If you were wondering how the Middle East was reacting to Trump’s absolute trashing of what was left of the international law with his ethnic cleansing plan for Gaza and the US takeover of sovereign territory, Saudi Arabia has responded before dawn:

The independent MP for Goldstein is speaking to the NPC on the future of independents.

This will no doubt have her Liberal (re)challenger Tim Wilson in conniptions over the free publicity she is receiving. WIlson is trying to win back Goldstein in what more than one Liberal MP has suggested to me is a ‘gift’ to Daniel’s re-election bid.

Although Wilson did get some attention of his own – we note that in the CBD column of the SMH, Wilson declined to answer why one of his volunteers was sporting a red MAGA style hat. SMH mused it was the Australian version – Make Albanese Go Away, but as the columnists noted themselves, probably not the look the moderate Liberal voters of Goldstein are going for.

Angus Taylor and Jane Hume are holding a press conference in a short little bit to discuss the selected living cost indexes data released today (Greg Jericho covered that off a little earlier but the takeaway is: the ABS divided households up into types – employees (ie someone working); government beneficiaries (so those on Jobseeker or Disability Support or Single Parenting Payment), Age Pension and “Self-funded (or let’s be honest, tax-break funded) retirees. The upshot is that in the past year the increase in the cost of living was: Employees: 4.0%, Age Pensioners: 2.5%, Other govt transfer recipients: 3.2%, “Self-funded” retirees: 2.5%, CPI: 2.4%. – The big reason for the difference with inflation is in the past year the cost of mortgage repayments went up 14.7% in 2024 (down from a 18.9% rise in the year to September.) And since March 2022, mortgage repayments have risen… (gulp) 159%)

Greg predicts that Taylor and Hume will say that since June 2022 employee cost of living has gone up 17.7%. He’d like you to keep in mind that in June 2022 it was rising at 4.6% – the highest for 11 years, whereas now it is rising at 4.0%

David Shoebridge continued:

“Even more tellingly, the Liberal Cormack Foundation has given Advance half a million dollars. It’s an investment, they see, in the Liberal Party’s political future. But they keep trying to hide it and pretend it’s an independent group.
What? An independent group of billionaires spruiking Liberal policies? That’s what it is.
Advance wants to bring Trumpian far-right politics here so that billionaires profit while communities and the planet suffer.

It’s no coincidence that Advance and its Liberal Party backers are sounding distinctly Trumpian right
now. In fact, the people who set up and funded Advance also set up and funded a bunch of other think tanks and astroturf groups around the world that are members of the US based Atlas Network. In fact, Atlas has hundreds of these organisations active around the world, many here in Australia and including one you might have heard of recently: the Heritage Foundation, which literally wrote Project 2025 for Donald Trump.

It is the same playbook everywhere these billionaire funded junk tanks and their astroturf groups operate. Advance and these other groups want to pit people in our community against one another.

They want to misinform and divide and conquer for their own interests, and we reject their division.”

He then moved on to youth justice – but it is to my knowledge the first mention of the Atlas Network in the parliament.

Reading back through the Hansard record to find out what happened overnight is always a mixed bag – once most journalists are switched off for the night, the speeches can go into some very strange territories.

But Greens senator David Shoebridge used his speaking slot in the adjournment debate to speak about something which is not often mentioned openly in Australian politics – the Atlas Network.

Shoebridge said in the senate:

“So-called Advance Australia is just the Liberal Party’s most extreme faction. Advance is a front group for the most conservative and divisive elements inside the coalition.
It was started by people who were literally Tony Abbott’s faction allies and mates.

They want Prime Minister Dutton so the grift can continue.
We hear from them that it’s all grassroots and common sense, but it’s literally billionaire climate change deniers trying to overturn our democracy to line their pockets. They are lining up against the Greens, and to that I say good.
If this lot don’t like you, then you’re doing the right thing by the planet and you’re doing the right thing by ordinary folks.
Advance claims to be powered by grassroots donations; that’s their social media spin, but AEC donations data shows this is far from the case. Some of the wealthiest Australians are recorded as being

Advance’s big backers, having funnelled hundreds of thousands of dollars through shady holding companies to keep Advance’s campaigns to destroy climate action, to defeat progressive social policy and to stop justice for First Nations. They are the richest people in Australia drawing their battlelines to protect their wealth and their privilege. They hated the Voice because it could have challenged their pillage of natural resources of this country.

And they’re attacking the Greens because we don’t just roll over and have our bellies tickled by billionaires. In fact, we want to tax them back to Earth.
Advance was, in part, founded by Dr Maurice Newman, a Liberal Party insider and climate science denier, who, bafflingly, is apparently holding out for global cooling to chill his drinks. How Liberal is this block? Well, John Howard appointed him as chair of the ABC. He remains a close friend of John Howard, and he was chairman of Tony Abbott’s Business Advisory Council.

You might have heard about him in 2023, when Mr Newman wrote an article where he attributed the loss of the Australian cricket team in India that year to Australian cricketers being
‘too woke’.

Unfortunately for him the Australian cricket team then turned around and won the Cricket World Cup
that year, beating India in the finals and, in fact, won the Ashes. It turns out his takes on cricket are about as good as his takes on politics and climate!’

Post continued.

Senator Lambie is proposing to cap salaries for university Vice-Chancellors and senior public servants at $430,000 a year.

It’s true that remuneration for these two groups has exploded over recent decades. Accounting for inflation, Vice-Chancellors were already paid $300,000 per year in 1985, today’s figure is over $1 million. Similarly Australian public service heads of department now receive an average of over $900,000 in remuneration per year.

Workers and students have not kept up. From 1985 to 2023, adjusting for inflation, income support for students grew by less than 20%, average full-time earnings grew nearly 40%, Group of Eight Vice-Chancellor remuneration grew 320%.

High pay for Vice-Chancellors doesn’t seem to improve student learning experiences. There is no strong relationship between Vice-Chancellor pay and student satisfaction. In fact, the three universities paying their Vice-Chancellors the most, have very low levels of student satisfaction.

Nor are lower-level staff benefiting in our unequal education system. In 2022 Vice-Chancellor remuneration was at least 7 times more than that for university lecturers, more than 9 times than for high school teacher and over 10 times more than for primary school teachers. Casualisation, job insecurity and unpaid work and even contraventions of employment law are now rife in the university sector, the National Tertiary Education Union estimates that there is “more than $400 million in wage theft” across the sector.

You can read more about how students are not benefiting in our system here, and more on issue facing university staff here.  

It has been A morning.

In case you need a catch up – Donald Trump has killed off any pretense for a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine, holding a press conference with a grinning Benjamin Netanyahu (a man wanted by the ICC to face war crime charges, including charges of crimes against humanity)when he announced the United States would “own” the Gaza strip, a sovereign territory and force Palestinians into surrounding Middle Eastern countries. Make no mistake, that amounts to ethnic cleansing.

Trump spoke of the United States leveling Gaza and then rebuilding it, as if it were a New York warehouse development project. This will have wide ranging impacts across the geopolitical space, but most particularly the Palestinians and the Middle East at large, where Trump has effectively threatened to force Jordan and Egypt to accept Palestinian forced refugees (the US is a massive funder of Jordan and Egypt and Trump is effectively threatening to collapse both nations to get what he wants).

There has been no response from the Australian government or the opposition.

In domestic political news, the fight over who has the better lunch quip continues as the Coalition and government fight over the opposition’s schnitty and sanga policy, and who cares more about small business.

The government has banned China AI chatbot DeepSeek from government devices following security advice, but isn’t applying the same ruler over US based Big Tech, despite the risks posed by Elon Musk and co.

A second person has died in the Queensland floods. There is still no talk about the need to stop fossil fuels.

Unemployment has been historically low but as data released by the ABS today shows, there are lots of people who want a job but are missing out because they need to care for their children.

The ABS released Barriers and Incentives to Labour Force Participation. It shows 213,000 people want a job but are unavailable to start work.

What are the main reasons they’re unavailable? For both women and men, the main reason was because they have to care for children. 58% of women nominated caring for children as a reason they could start work. For men it was 43%.

More high quality, affordable, and available early childhood education and care would help tens of thousands of people gain access to employment. This would not only be great for these people but would also come with huge economic benefits for Australia.

A big barrier to this is not just affordability but also availability. This is why the Australia Institute proposes that early childhood education and care should be offered in the same way as school education. You can read more about how to fix our broken childcare system here.

While the government is happy that inflation grew just 2.4% we always need to remember than inflation (measured as the Consumer Price Index) is not cost-of-living.

The big reason is that the CPI does not measure mortgage repayments. Good thing is that the ABS does also measure “cost of living” which includes mortgages (and doesn’t include the cost of building a new home, which let’s be honest, ain’t a cost of living).

The ABS also divided households up into types – employees (ie someone working); government beneficiaries (so those on Jobseeker or Disability Support or Single Parenting Payment), Age Pension and “Self-funded (or let’s be honest, tax-break funded) retirees.

The upshot is that in the past year the increase in the cost of living was:

Employees: 4.0%

Age Pensioners: 2.5%

Other govt transfer recipients: 3.2%

“Self-funded” retirees: 2.5%

CPI: 2.4%

The big reason for the difference with inflation is in the past year the cost of mortgage repayments went up 14.7% in 2024 (down from a 18.9% rise in the year to September.) And since March 2022, mortgage repayments have risen… (gulp) 159%.

This is why the government (and anyone with a mortgage) will be glad that the market thinks there is a 95% chance the RBA will cut rates in 2 weeks

The press conference following Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu has made it very, very clear what Trump plans for the Gaza strip and potentially the West Bank. Make no mistake, what he is suggesting amounts to the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people and the take over of a sovereign territory and follows on from his comments that he expects Jordan, Egypt and other Middle Eastern nations to take in the Palestinian people.

Trump told reporters:

“The US will take over the Gaza Strip, and we will do a job with it too. We’ll own it. And be responsible for dismantling all of the dangerous unexploded bombs and other weapons on the site, level the site and get rid of the destroyed buildings, level it out, create an economic development that will supply unlimited numbers of jobs and housing for the people of the area”.

Trump continued:

“I do see along term ownership position and I see it bringing great stability to that part of the Middle East and maybe the entire Middle East. Everybody I have spoken to, this was not a decision made lightly, everybody I have spoken to love the idea of the United States owning that piece of land, developing and creating thousands of jobs with something that will be magnificent, really magnificent that nobody would know and nobody can look because all they see is death and destruction and rubble and demolished buildings falling all over.

A terrible sight.

I have studied this very closely over a lot of months and I have seen it from every different angle and it is a very dangerous place to be. It is only going to get worse. I think it is an idea that has gotten tremendous, I am talking about from the highest level of leadership, gotten tremendous [response] and if the United States can help to bring stability and peace in the Middle East we will do that.”

The Australia Institute’s Centre For Future Work report modelled the effects of early retirement by firefighters and paramedics (due to things like physical and psychological challenges and very few alternative career options) and looked how how retirement could be made easier, given what the career cost them.

This analysis found that:

• Under optimistic assumptions an early-retiring single firefighter can expect their superannuation to run out six years before male life expectancy, nine years before female life expectancy, and 15 years earlier than for a regular retiree.
• For paramedics these figures are seven years before male life expectancy, ten years before female life expectancy, and 14 years earlier than for a regular retiree.
• Under alternative scenarios, incorporating plausible risks, an early-retiring firefighters and paramedics can expect their superannuation to run out 15 or more years before life expectancy.

The report’s core recommendation was for higher superannuation contributions for emergency responders and one-off end-of-career contributions for workers already approaching retirement age.

Nick McKim will be speaking about the Greens legislation to try and introduce higher superannuation for paramedics and fire fighters, which will no doubt have drawn from this work.

A reminder of why policy work is so important – it can have so many positive aspects on people’s lives.

Also in the parliament today – Grace Stanke the US nuclear power activist and former Miss America 2023, as part of her ‘Australian tour’ for the Australian Nuclear Association.

A reminder that the Temu Trumps pushing this policy do not actually intend on enacting it – it is a distraction to take over the political agenda. And it is working.

In case you missed it, researcher Jack Thrower has done some brilliant analysis on Australian vice-chancellor pay – you will be shocked to learn that high pay doesn’t equal better outcomes for students.

Jacqui Lambie has been listening – she has called a snap presser, with Rex Patrick (who is looking for a return to the senate) calling for caps to their pay packets (along with departmental secretaries).

We’ll bring you more on that very soon, as well.

Back to domestic news and Greens senator Nick McKim will formally announce the party’s legislation to increase superannuation contributions for firefighters and paramedics.

McKim is not only a senator – he is also an active firefighter and paramedic. We will bring you more on that policy, soon.

We covered this off a little earlier, but for those who missed what it looked like, including the grinning Benjamin Netanyahu (a man wanted by the International Criminal Court) here is Donald Trump completely trashing any pretend talk of a two-state-solution for Palestine.

It is worth mentioning because it was only yesterday that the Coalition’s Andrew Wallace claimed: “Labor chose cowardice over courage when the International Criminal Court issued warrants for Israel’s
democratically elected leaders” as well as “This government voted to recognise the state of Palestine at the UN General Assembly, breaking with allies and decades of bipartisanship on this matter”.

The Coalition have been criticising Labor after Penny Wong changed Australia’s position from formally recognising a Palestinian state at the end of a two-state peace process to recognising it as ‘part’ of the two-state solution.

Now the United States has taken the mask off and completely scrapped the policy (many knew would never be a reality) and endorsed what amounts to the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians in an offical White House press conference, does the Coalition turn against the US for ‘breaking with allies and decades of bipartisanship on this matter’ or does it continue to follow the US down the rabbit hole like a lap dog? Will the Australian government defend its position?

It is impossible to say in this climate.

And for those who know no bounds to the punishment they are willing to accept, you’ll find the senate business, here.

The government has started the parliament day with a flurry of bill introductions in the house.

You can follow along with the house business, here

It is hot enough to melt the Zooper Dooper I’m having for second breakfast, but photographer-at-large Mike Bowers is still out and about like the trooper he is.

He caught this photo on the parliament house lawns this morning.

Politicians across both major parties have spoken about the Queensland floods and the ‘resilience’ of Queenslanders, particularly north Queenslanders in dealing with these climate disasters. Questions have focused on ‘what is being done to help residents’ and ‘mitigation’ and insurance has also been raised (which makes sense seeing how difficult it is becoming to insure against these climate disasters).

But political leaders are not being asked the pressing questions – which is why are they continuing to support fossil fuels when we know the impact they are having on the climate, and why aren’t they doing everything in their power to ensure these climate disasters don’t get any worse (which is the goal by the way – everything you are seeing across the world – that is the new benchmark. It won’t get ‘better’ than that. But if we act, we can stop it from getting worse).

ClimaMeter have looked at the Queensland floods and concluded they were “primarily driven by human-driven climate change, which intensified the meteorological conditions that led to the event”.

You can read the report, here but the main points from the report which led to their conclusions were:

• Meteorological conditions similar to that causing floods in Queensland are up to 17 mm/day (up to 20%) wetter over the coast of Queensland. Additionally, conditions are up to 5 km/h (up to 20%) windier offshore Queensland and up to 1.5 ºC warmer in the present compared to the past. 
• This event was associated with exceptional meteorological conditions.
• We ascribe the heavier precipitation associated with Queensland floods to human driven climate change and natural climate variability likely played a minor role.

But somehow, it never seems to be the ‘time’ to talk about it, does it?

Over in Nationals land and leader David Littleproud seems to think it is 2016 in Trump land and Australia just needs to advocate to ensure its exports are not hit by Trump’s tariffs (a reminder that it is the US importers/exporters who pay the tariff and the US is in a trade surplus with Australia)

Littelproud told Sky News very early this morning:

“Ultimately, we prefer to see a rules-based world trade order that’s served Australia well and served the globe well in getting living standards higher for everybody. So it’s important that we respect those and trade wars don’t actually help anyone. In fact, they add to inflation because they are tax, and ultimately someone has to pay for that. So we’d prefer to see that both countries can sit down. I appreciate that President Trump came with a mandate. He made it very clear, particularly for Mexico and Canada, around border protection that they needed to lift their game.

Otherwise, tariffs have been imposed, but there’s also these tariffs feeding into China, which will have an impact. Now that means that if we get a slow down on the economy, they’ll have a broader impact on Australia. But we may get some short-term gains, particularly out of agriculture.

The last time we saw this, when President Trump was here last time and he imposed tariffs on China, we actually saw increases in commodity prices for ourselves, because China pivoted to Australia, rather the United States. But there are only short-term gains and no one should think that that’s what we should be aiming for. We’d rather see that the rules-based order returns and that problems are resolved and we get on with free trade between our nations, because we’re only a nation of 27 million people and we are a trading nation. And unless we have those that environment created for us, then ultimately Australians will bear the cost of that, ultimately at the checkout.”

John Lyons went on to say:

The interesting thing what he’s saying there prefaces the possible collapse of Jordan and Egypt. Because, they are opposed to this transfer plan. For every reason. They feel they can’t absorb the Palestinians, they believe that the world can’t just say OK, there is no homeland for the Palestinians. But, Donald Trump has a leverage over those two, Egypt and Jordan. They’re essentially kept in place by American funding and military.

If internally, like in Jordan, there’s a huge Palestinian population there now anyway, they’re saying no to this plan, on the weekend, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt and Jordan – all met and said no – if Donald Trump insists on that, he can also say, then, his leverage is I can pull the funding. If he pulls the American funding out of Egypt and Jordan, they can’t survive in their current state without that.

So we’re looking at that press conference at the complete redrawing of the Middle East. It’s the most extraordinary 10 minutes I have seen for a long time.

Speaking of the United States and Donald Trump, the US leader has just met with Israel’s leader Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House and held a press conference which the ABC’s global affairs editor (and author of the excellent ‘Balcony over Jeusalem’, one of the books recommended by the Summer Reading for MPs group) John Lyons’ called “the most extraordinary press conference from the White House I have seen”.

Lyons doesn’t mean in the good way.

He reports:

“Two men at the height of their power, essentially saying that a two-state solution for the Palestinians is dead. To have Donald Trump saying how un-liveable Gaza is, it’s a mess now, the explosives, it’s too dangerous. And to have Benjamin Netanyahu sitting next to him, smiling, grinning, sometimes laughing, it’s been America’s bombs often dropped by Israeli jets that have rendered Gaza un-liveable and these two men are now essentially talking…that was the most extraordinary press conference from the White House I have ever seen.

Where Donald Trump is saying, yes, there’s resistance from Egypt and Jordan, but they’ll take them. The Palestinians out of Gaza. He said the other day we’ll clean it out. This is language that no US president and very few in Israel, the far-right in Israel has tried to avoid words like “cleaning out.”

Now, it’s interesting there, I think the new element there was Donald Trump clearly broadening what he sees as his attempt to transfer Palestinians out of Gaza, and who knows, the West Bank may be next. But he kept talking – he was talking like – I was amazed at the language – like he was a real estate developer. “four, five, six different areas, maybe.” Broadening it to four or five different countries he said.

He kept talking about “we’ll build them beautiful houses and sunshine”, like he’s talking about some new outer suburban development.’

Continued in next post

Reading over the hansard from yesterday’s urgency debate on Donald Trump, we are reminded that while democracy may be the best system we have, it certainly isn’t perfect and doesn’t always get it right.

On a related note, here is UAP senator Ralph Babet’s take on Trump (Babet’s life achievements to date have been being reposted by Trump on social media – a high I feel he may be chasing for the rest of his life)

Just leaving this here for the history books.

Babet:

“The Left’s hysterics over President Trump only demonstrate how dangerous the Left really are to the world and to democracy. They complain about President Trump being a populist. What’s wrong with that? What is populism?
It’s doing what the majority of people want you to do; that’s populism. When the Left complain that Trump is a populist, they’re really just admitting that their own policies and their own ideas are so extreme and so nonsensical that nobody wants them.

Then they claim that their lack of popularity is a virtue somehow. It would be hilarious if it weren’t so silly. Donald Trump is not a threat to Australia—he’s not. He’s only a threat to the progressive Left in Australia and all across the world. Those people believe that trashing this great country and their own, wherever they might be— they’re trashing their country with their extreme ideas that nobody wants, nobody believes and nobody can afford.
Do you know what Donald Trump is? He’s exactly what the world needs; that’s what he is.“

We noted yesterday that former Liberal minister turned official lobbyist Christopher Pyne had written an ode to imperialism in an op-ed in the SMH and Age, calling for Greenland to embrace United States ownership for…reasons. Those reasons weren’t actually mapped out, other than some vague references to history where imperial powers have ‘bought’ nations and because Pyne thinks the US would offer the people of Greenland a richer and safer life (based on what evidence, again, is unclear).

Well Tony Wright, who has been covering politics for as longer than I have been able to read, has written a response to Pyne, asking him to check his history

Pyne resorts to precedent and history to support Trump’s wish to take over Greenland, but history, it happens, is a double-edged Viking sword.

Erik the Red’s son, Leif Erikson, is credited with being the first European to make his way to North America, where a Viking settlement was established in Newfoundland, also around the year 1000. Erikson later became chief of the Vikings on Greenland.

Perhaps, rather than Trump’s administration grabbing Greenland, Pyne might instead consider it is about time for the Scandinavians to reclaim America.

Foreign minister Penny Wong (who has been a little quieter than usual lately) has released a statement on the “difficult and dark time” Australian academic Dr Yang Jun has been through, one year on from receiving a suspended death sentence:

“Today marks one year since Australian citizen, Dr Yang Jun, received a suspended death sentence in Beijing. The past year, and the five years of detention before his sentencing, have been a difficult and dark time for Dr Yang. Throughout, he has demonstrated his inner strength and remarkable resilience.

Today, my thoughts are with Dr Yang, his family and his many loved ones. The Australian Government has made clear to China that we remain appalled by Dr Yang’s suspended death sentence. We hold serious concerns about Dr Yang’s health and conditions. We continue to press to ensure his needs are met and he receives appropriate medical care.

Dr Yang is entitled to basic standards of justice, procedural fairness and humane treatment, in accordance with international norms and China’s legal obligations. In his communication with the Government, Dr Yang has made clear he knows he has the support of his country. We want to see him reunited with his family. The Government will continue to advocate for Dr Yang at every opportunity.”

Checking in on the climate disaster in north Queensland – a second life has been lost.

AAP reports:

Flood-hit communities starting to return to their homes are being warned to brace for more heavy downpours, which have already claimed the lives of two people, in the coming days.

Record-breaking rain has lashed north Queensland during the past week, sparking floods that have cut power, damaged roads and forced hundreds of people to flee.

There has been some relief with heavy rainfall easing, providing hope a massive clean-up facing the inundated region is set to finally begin.

However, the Bureau of Meteorology has warned major flooding is ongoing in multiple catchments despite the isolated and less widespread showers.

Major flood warnings were still in place for the Herbert and Haughton River catchments late on Tuesday after the region was lashed by rain.

Andrew Charlton was asked by ABC News Breakfast to put on his former-self hat (before entering parliament, Charlton ran several successful businesses and amassed quite the property holding) and think about whether or not he would have liked the Coalition’s Schnitty and Sanga tax write off plan. He says:

“There are existing proposals in, frameworks within the tax system that enable people to claim some entitlements, for example for light lunches in office are available to small and large businesses. I don’t think extending that to golf days and long lunches is the right priority for Australia’s tax system right now. We have a lot of important challenges that require resources in Australia and I think most fair-minded Australians would look at our priorities and think they would be at the bottom, not the top, of that list at a time when we have big draws on resources for health, education, supporting people with cost of living and many other issues the Government is facing.”

What exactly is that risk?

Andrew Charlton tells ABC News Breakfast:

“There are three risks that are posed by generative AI in general. The first is that information that you upload might not be private. So we’d encourage anybody using generative AI – it’s a wonderful tool and very helpful for many applications in our lives but you need to be aware that the information you upload may not be private, so our advice is that we wouldn’t want people to upload anything that they wouldn’t want to ultimately become public.

The second risk is that information you get back from generative AI might not be accurate. It may contain misinformation, be biased or not cover certain topics. And the second other risk is malware. Don’t click on links and be careful where and when you download applications.”

Does the government need to do an education campaign?

Charlton:

“The Government is providing information to people about what they should and should not be doing online and how to keep themselves safe. We do that work every day helping businesses, individuals, small groups and community groups to understand the risks online and making sure they’re aware of how best to mitigate the risks. Cybersecurity is a challenge facing all of us in Australia. It’s increasing. We have a cybersecurity attack in Australia every 6 minutes. And so it is very important, as you say, not just that we get the regulatory settings right, but that we make sure Australians are best prepared to harden their own targets and ward off any security risks they can.”

The government’s special envoy for cybersecurity (special envoys are used by leaders as a reward (or a bone) to MPs who they can’t fit in the ministry) Andrew Charlton has had a few moments in the sun this morning in light of the DeepSeek ban from government devices.

Charlton said its about taking the advice of security agencies seriously:

“It’s absolutely not a symbolic move. It’s a very important distinction that has to be made here. The distinction is that you cannot use these applications on your government devices. Those are devices where other sensitive government information is found, you can use TikTok or indeed DeepSeek on personal devices, which are not connected to government systems and that distinction is really important. We don’t want to expose government systems to these applications. That’s the main source of the risk and that’s why this ban is [happening].”

Meanwhile, in other ‘what are they doing’ news, Anthony Albanese is renting out his recently purchased $4m Central Coast house. News.com reports the house will be rented for $1,500 a week. The news would have given Labor election strategists an even stronger eye twitch given that the purchase of the house in a cost of living crisis is still being brought up by voters, particularly women. (It shouldn’t be a surprise that women remember it, given research shows women usually run the household budget and therefore would be very finely attuned to cost of living pressures).

Turns out that yes, yes this is the hill Sussan Ley is dying on.

She also appeared on Sky where she repeated her press release in what is no doubt a stunning preview of an upcoming question time performance.

She was also asked about Jim Chalmers’ costings of the Coalition’s Schnitty and Sanga plan (small businesses will be able to write off up to $20,000 in lunches (no alcohol) which she has declared are…FAKE.

Ley:

“These are clearly, these are clearly fake costings. And you know why I think they’re throwing them at us, because they have nothing else for small businesses, nothing at all, and to laugh at something like this that helps those businesses, who, as I said, are really struggling. You would go into those businesses to get your morning coffee. Australians love them. They’re in the High Street. They’re working incredibly hard. They always have a smile on their face. I’m talking about this on your program every week, because I’m passionate about it.”

As a former barista, I can attest that no, we do not always have a smile on our face.

While we are still on the topic of what passes for ‘debate’ in Australian politics at the moment, Sussan Ley’s big media push this morning is based around the release of the Albanese government ‘national small business strategy’ which Ley calls “an insult to millions of small businesses across Australia”.

“There is not a single new policy or measure in Labor’s new so-called “National Small Business Strategy”. A third of the strategy is made up of cover pages, artwork and photos, with another third taken up by small business statistics and case studies of existing policies already being delivered by state governments,” Ley says in the release.

But wait – Ley has them on the ropes!

“The document does not even use images of Australian small businesses. It includes multiple images sourced from stock files of a New Jersey bakery in the United States of America, two carpenters that featured in a Bank of America innovation campaign and a stock image of chef featured on Pew’s Demographic Overview of Illinois Secure Choice Program Population.“

Ok, yes it is dumb to use stock photos of American businesses in a document based around Australian small businesses. But they are used because they are much cheaper than hiring a photographer and getting originals. Stock photos are those sold by agencies on a subscription service (usually). You type in ‘small business’ and a bunch of photos of people smiling behind counters etc pop up, and you just slot them in to whatever you’re using, with the licensing taken care of through the subscription (when used for commercial reasons). Or they can be free. It is one of the rules of modelling that you never sell or pose for photos for someone who plans on selling them as stock images, because you never know what your image will end up being used to sell (or where).

But is this really the quality of debate we should be accepting?

Ley is demanding Small Business Minister, Julie Collins, “come clean on how much this “strategy” cost the taxpayer and why it is filled with stock photos of Americans”.

Given *gestures at everything* is this the hill we’re dying on?

Jane Hume is also very exercised over the government’s costing and rubbishing of the Coalition’s Scnitty plan. Jim Chalmers release Treasury costings yesterday saying it would cost at least $1.6bn. The Coalition has scoffed at that but won’t release their own costings.

Hume was asked about the whole kerfuffle and told the ABC:

“What absolute nonsense the government has come out with! I mean, let’s put aside the fact that they have plenty to do themselves, but somehow they’re concentrating on a Coalition policy announcement. More importantly, they then went and asked the public service, politicised the public service, asking them to cost a Coalition policy.

Now the Treasury Secretary has come out and said that he hasn’t costed a Coalition policy, that it was simply the parameters that Jim Chalmers gave him, that that’s what they costed.

Well, again, what’s Jim Chalmers doing? Shouldn’t he be concentrating on his own policies? Shouldn’t he be concentrating on lowering inflation, improving economic growth, restoring the standard of livings that we have now lost or gone backwards?

We have costed this policy. Of course, we costed this policy by convention. Oppositions use the Parliamentary Budget Office, and we trust the Parliamentary Budget Office. Indeed, it was something that was introduced by a Labor government to stop this very behaviour.”

Well, Chalmers would probably say that he has worked on lowering inflation, because despite how many commentators complain that it has been “artificially lowered” (a term economic commentators use when they are forced to admit that fiscal policy has helped lower inflation, but they don’t want to give the government credit) by things like the energy rebates (which were deliberately designed to lower CPI and therefore lower the price rises of everything attached to CPI and therefore help to lower inflation), inflation has come down and is sitting in the RBA’s target band. Which means the RBA is out of excuses not to cut rates.

It is also worth noting that Hume has said she would be focusing on ‘getting the budget back on track’ if in government, and cut the ‘big spending’. What is that big spending? Well in a recent op-ed in the AFR, Hume said:

“Every decision is a choice – from spending $500 million on a divisive referendum, or $40 million on advertising automatic tax cuts, or 36,000 new public servants in Canberra.”

So that’s $540m and then cutting the public service to replace with the private sector at three times the cost.

Whenever the Coalition needs someone serious to discuss policy, they send in Jane Hume. Hume’s workload has doubled since Simon Birmingham’s retirement (he was the other ‘serious and sensible voice’ the Coalition sent in when it needed serious and sensible responses) and Hume was already doing double time trying to explain the Coalition’s finance policies given Angus Taylor is the lead shadow minister.

Hume was sent out this morning to talk about the hate laws which the parliament will debate is debating in earnest. In a nutshell, both major parties are in agreement the law needs to be strengthened. The government wants to apply criminal penalties for urging or threatening violence against a target group, rather than having civil penalties apply, while also reducing the threshold for prosecution to recklessness, rather than intention to incite or threaten violence. The Coalition wants to go further and specifically mention places of worship with Peter Dutton entirely focused on anti-Semitism.

Given it wasn’t that long ago (politically speaking) that the Coalition wanted to scrape 18C and the racial discrimination laws altogether, the ABC’s Sally Sara asks Hume whether that was a mistake by the Coalition, given it now wants to strengthen the hate laws.

Hume:

“That was a debate of some time ago, and the issue was around the wording around at what racial discrimination looked like. I think that what we’ve seen here is a specific rise in anti-Semitism, and that’s something that we need to deal with in the strongest possible terms. Peter Dutton has been very clear and very strong on this. We have to respond to the weak responses that we’ve seen so far in order to protect our own communities.”

Sarah Hanson-Young is also asked about the allergic reaction Australia’s politicians have when it comes to criticising Donald Trump. Instead of addressing the administration head on, Australia’s leaders from both sides of politics keep falling back on the ‘exceptional friendship’ Australia has with the United States, (which seems to be just Australia following America around everywhere and hoping for the best – you can learn more about that with Dr Emma Shortis)

The Greens put up an urgency motion in the senate yesterday, arguing that Australia needed to break away from Trump and the US. It was voted down by the major parties. This morning Hanson-Young says:

“Well, I am concerned that Australia is trying to hide behind the couch and hope that Donald Trump and Musk and Zuckerberg and all of Donald Trump’s billionaire bros don’t notice us. I don’t think that’s the way a confident independent nation like Australia should behave.

Obviously, we need diplomatic relations but, you know, take a leaf out of Malcolm Turnbull’s comments on this when he says you don’t deal with bullies by giving in to them or sucking up to them. You have to be honest and upfront and I think lots of Australians will be worried about the Australian Labor and Liberal parties who seemingly are following tune with the billionaires of just wanting to suck up to Donald Trump rather than taking on the agenda. It’s not the type of politics we need here in Australia. This creeping in of Trumpian policies into Australia and the type of control that billionaires have over politics in the US right now is scary and it can’t be allowed to happen here.”

Asked about her personal thoughts on the DeepSeek ban, given it is on the heels of the TikTok ban (although politicians still have accounts – they usually have the app on a separate device) Sarah Hanson-Young says:

“TikTok – us as politicians, most of us have TikTok accounts and, you know, there’s millions of Australians on TikTok so it’s a way of engaging with them, but I must say we can’t have them on our government-issued phones.

That’s something the security agencies have told government not to do. But I also just think there’s a bigger question here about the role of big tech and billionaires in politics and I don’t want to miss this opportunity to say how creepy those shots of Rupert Murdoch in the Oval Office with Donald Trump were, that surfaced yesterday, whether it’s media Moguls like Rupert Murdoch or Elon Musk, frankly, these type of media and tech billionaires should not be calling the shots on government policy.“

In the wake of the announcement the government is banning Chinese AI chatbot DeepSeek from employees’ devices, Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young has asked why the government isn’t doing the same thing when it comes to addressing big tech.

She tells ABC News Breakfast:

“All we know is what the Government has released publicly, that they’ve been given advice from the security agencies that having this chatbot on government-issued phones and devices potentially puts the information on our devices at risk. So, you know, I’ll take the security agencies’ advice on that one. But what it does do is highlights just how fast technology is moving and how quickly governments need to catch up with the regulation of big tech in particular. AI, social media, online spaces, and I am worried that despite being able to move fast on something like this in relation to this Chinese-owned chatbot, that we’re seeing the Government and seemingly the Opposition starting to crab-walk away from stronger regulations against the big tech companies and billionaires like, of course, Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg.

Ukrainian presiden Volodymyr Zelenskyy has tweeted about a conversation he held with Anthony Albanese overnight (you always learn more about these things from other country’s leaders than our own, no matter who is leading the country) where Zelenskyy made the case for the defence aid package to be fast tracked:

“I spoke with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese @AlboMP and thanked for Australia’s unwavering support for Ukraine and our people. It is crucial that our coalition in defense of international law remains truly global. We are also working to expedite the new defense aid package. We discussed strengthening sanctions against Russia for its war, and Australia is ready to take further steps. Ukraine’s priority remains reliable security guarantees, reinforcing our defense, and increasing pressure on Russia to end the war. We also addressed diplomatic efforts and appreciate Australia’s firm stance that all substantive negotiations on Ukraine must include Ukraine—this is the only way to achieve a just peace. Additionally, we must establish all the circumstances surrounding the case of Australian citizen Oscar Jenkins, who fought for Ukraine and has been taken prisoner by Russia.“

In case you missed it (hopefully because you have a life and much better things to do than keep a constant eye on the ridiculousness of Australian politicians) Sussan Ley was last in the news on January 26 after a speech she gave in her electorate compared (favourably) Australia’s colonisation to Elon Musk’s mission to colonise Mars (nothing more attractive to a billionaire than a whole new planet to dominate and destroy apparently).

Ley said then:

“All those years ago those ships did not arrive – as some would have you believe – as invaders. They did not come to destroy or to pillage.

“…In what could be compared to Elon Musk’s SpaceX’s efforts to build a new colony on Mars, men in boats arrived on the edge of the known world to embark on that new experiment. A new experiment and a new society.”

Ley was pushing back against what John Howard famously labelled the ‘blackarm band view of history’. Also known as historical fact. Which it seems Ley should probably scrub up on if she doesn’t think the British came to what was later called Australia to invade, destroy and pillage, given well established British colonisation history.

Ley is asked on the ABC why she made the comparison and said:

“That speech did attract attention, it’s bringing Australians together. I’m tired of the divisiveness. I’m a strong supporter of the Australia Day being on 26 January. I love our country, a country I migrated to many years ago. I want Australians to be proud of what they have. I have acknowledged our dark past and the chapters in our history where we haven’t done well. My record as environment minister and health minister backs that in. But Australia Day is important for every Australian to come together under that one flag.“

That sound you hear is the culture war machine whirring up ahead of the election. Everytime a Coalition MP mentions ‘one flag’ Peter Dutton receives an aura point.

For reasons lost to most people with reason, Sussan Ley and the Coalition are continuing to defend the policy to give businesses with up to $10m in turnover a tax break for lunches. The Coalition didn’t release costings, so Treasurer Jim Chalmers did it for them, releasing figures from Treasury yesterday.

Chalmers said the policy would cost, at best $1.6bn and potentially up to $10bn which had shadow treasurer Angus Taylor blowing a casket and writing to Treasury Secretary Steven Kennedy over the politicisation of the Treasury.

This Angus Taylor. Accusing someone else of ‘politicisation’.

ANYWAYS.

Ley is doing the media rounds today in defence of the small business schnitty plan and she tells ABC News Breakfast it is for the good of the country.

“Let’s not forget the effect it has on the small business itself. And these business owners are standing in their businesses 15 hours a day. They’re working incredibly hard. They’re making the coffee you pick up on your way to work. Their making the beautiful food you eat. They’re not paying themselves because it’s so tough. I can’t understand why the government ridiculed the policy.“

The Coalition still hasn’t released its own costings, while continuing to dispute the government’s figure. So why won’t the opposition just release what it thinks the schnitty for the country plan would cost?

Ley:

“Costings will come out. Every single one of our policies, including this one, in the lead-up to the election. That’s not in doubt.“

Hello and welcome to the second sitting day of the year! Labor is wasting no time getting ahead of potential issues, with Tony Burke preemptively banning the Chinese AI chatbot DeepSeek from government devices, after a security review found it posed an “unacceptable risk” to national security.

After Liberal senator James Paterson managed to make TikTok a national security issue (the Coalition has since reversed ferreted there with even Peter Dutton launching his own account in an attempt to appeal to Gen Z), Labor announced the ban on government devices ahead of today’s second sitting day in organised drops to the media.

After wiping billions of dollars from Wall Street (turns out China saying it can do something cheaper, and faster than American tech is still a big deal) DeepSeek rocketed to the top of app downloads, but any government employee with it on their official phone must now remove it, block access to it’s products and report to the government the actions they have taken. (ABC, Australia Post and other corporate government organisations are exempt from the ban and government employees can still have DeepSeek on private devices).

It shows how quickly Labor is looking to clear the decks of any potential issues ahead of the election, where national security is expected to play a role, as Dutton looks to shape the election ground according to his own strengths. But it also shows that China is still being treated as a threat, rather than a risk in a lot of spheres, while the United States is considered a friend who is just ‘going through it’, despite Donald Trump and ‘special government employee’ Elon Musk’s attacks on democracy – and ‘allies’.

Labor senator Raff Ciccone defended Trump/Musk against a Greens motion in the senate late yesterday:

I”t’s also fair to say that President Trump is like no other president we’ve seen before. From what we saw when he was last in the Oval Office and from what we will see over the next four years, it’s fair to say that his approach is always not very conventional. Having said that, we need to respect the outcome of the election last year. President Trump has also made it very clear that he’s going to do things very differently. We shouldn’t be surprised as he implements his ‘America first’ agenda.
As two nations, the United States and Australia have so much in common. But we are also two very different sovereign independent nations with our own ways of how we conduct business. Just as we respect the rights of American citizens to determine their own future, we have those same rights here in Australia. Equally, as Australians we are confident in our values, in our place in the world and in our ability to deliver on our national interests. So, contrary to what the Australian Greens are arguing in the motion, it’s not all doom and gloom.“

Which would be all fine and dandy if Australia wasn’t locked into security and defence arrangements with the United States that don’t serve our interests.

We’ll cover all the day’s events and more, with some research and factchecking thrown in. It’s a three coffee morning, on what is shaping up to be a muggy Canberra day – but hopefully there will be a bit more energy from those inside Capital Hill than what we saw yesterday. There wasn’t enough coffee in the world for that.

Ready? Let’s get into it.