Burke challenges opposition over confidence in security agencies
Tony Burke continues that answer after a point of order that was not a point of order. He is very fired up:
The guarantee of the government gets, and the guarantee in our security agencies. is the same guarantee [the] leader of the opposition would have given when he [oversaw] on visitor visas 4,994 people from Iraq, controlled by its Islamic State, described to other people who stood here as a death cult.
It’s the same guarantee the leader of the opposition would have given when he held my job about the 1,505 people he [took] in from Syria on visitor visas.
The same guarantee of the leader of the opposition would have given with respect to 864 people who came here from the Palestinian territories.
If you want to be on the side of the chamber, and you don’t have confidence in our security agencies, say so.
Because this government has confidence in our security agencies and those opposite, those opposite are now wanting to demand a whole lot of examples which, [if] tested against their record, they would fail.
The former army lawyer, David McBride, will be allowed to appeal his jail sentence for stealing defence documents and leaking them to the ABC after launching a late court application.
On Wednesday morning, McBride appeared in the ACT supreme court in his application to file an appeal outside of the usual 28-day window.
After the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions said it would not oppose, the court’s registrar granted approval for the appeal in a packed courtroom full of McBride’s supporters.
McBride’s legal team said they were seeking to have the appeal heard in March 2024 for a day.
Both legal teams will return to court next Thursday to confirm what dates they agree to hold the appeal.
McBride said he was grateful to the supreme court registrar for allowing him to attend and said he would probably not appear again in the following week.
As the former military lawyer exited the courtroom, the crowd of a few dozen clapped and cheered, shouting support.
Abortion has become a political issue again, with the Queensland election. Queensland Labor de-crimalised it in a very, very fraught campaign where LNP MPs were given a conscience vote. Those that voted with the government – which already had the numbers – found themselves facing preselection battles for what had been very safe seats. They faced the challengers down, but it was one of those ‘battle for the heart of the party’ moments.
Finance minister Katy Gallagher was asked about it on ABC radio this morning and said:
I look forward to the day when women’s health isn’t a political football that’s used and pulled out at election time. I think there’s been a lot of legislative reform, rightly, across states and territories.
And it is primarily an issue for states and territories around abortion legislation, to make sure it’s not a criminal offence and to put in place the legislative framework that allows women to make choices about their own reproductive health or involve doctors as appropriate.
And I really think it’s a matter between a woman and her health professional, and it’s unfortunate we see it rise up and down at election times, but I look forward to a day when we don’t have that political football brought out and used, and that this is treated, really as it should be, as a health matter between a woman and her health professional.
Queensland’s opposition leader has refused to say which way he would personally vote on a Katters’ Australian Party abortion bill to be introduced next parliament.
David Crisafulli spent the third day straight giving the same answers on the issue: “there will no change” and “it’s not part of our plan”.
He again refused to say whether his party - most of whom opposed abortion legalisation in 2018 - would be granted a conscience vote on the issue. Two MPs have said in public that they would vote against abortion if it came before parliament, in recent weeks.
KAP leader Robbie Katter told Sky News this morning “I’m your huckleberry, the KAP’ll put it in” by introducing a private members’ bill to bring the issue before parliament.
“I’m up for anything,” he said.
“Not part of our plan,” Crisafulli repeated on Wednesday.
“Katters’ priority is recriminalising abortion. Labor’s priority is running a scare campaign to brush over their failings in crime. Our plan is dealing with youth crime. So over to you Queensland.”
Labor leader Steven Miles said his party would be granted a conscience vote.
It’s been our long-held practice to have a conscience vote on those matters, but you know what our conscience says. Labor MPs support a women’s right to choose. And you know what the LNP MPs’ consciences say too; they are overwhelmingly opposed to a woman’s right to choose.”
Miles pointed out that all LNP MPs voted against a bill making abortion more available earlier in 2024.
Now we know that there will be a bill next term, and MPs should tell their constituents, or candidates should tell voters how they would vote on that bill.”
RBA’s Covid-era lending fund cost $9bn but ‘helped prevent dire economic outcomes’
Christopher Kent, a Reserve Bank assistant governor, is giving a speech this morning in Sydney related to the central bank’s term funding facility, one of its key tools to keep the economy afloat during the Covid pandemic.
The funding provided low-cost three-year funding to commercial banks and in so doing, helped lower borrowing costs at a time when markets were seizing up. The RBA’s cash rate was already on the way to just 0.1%, or about as low as it could go.
By the end of its operations, in mid-2021, the facility extended $188bn, with the major banks collecting $133bn and foreign banks $22bn.
All the money was repaid, and on average, outstanding lending rates fell by almost 100 basis points (or 1 percentage point).
In sum, the facility “met the objectives we set out for it at the start of the pandemic. It helped prevent dire economic outcomes at a time when the outlook was bleak and highly uncertain, and there was limited scope for further cuts to the cash rate,” Kent said.
A pedestrian walks past the RBA head office. Photograph: Flavio Brancaleone/AAP
The cost to the RBA, though, wasn’t small, at $9bn. One reason for the loss size was that the lending rate was fixed. When the economy recovered faster than expected and the RBA hiked its cash rate, what had been profitable until May 2022 started losing money for the bank.
Similarly, the extension of the facility in September 2020 turned out to have been unnecessary (although officials had little idea then how Covid variants would play out at the time).
The RBA “would consider” using the TFF again “in extreme circumstances when the cash rate target had been lowered to the full extent possible”, Kent said. And next time, a flexible rate would be on offer since the RBA and the banks have since upgraded their systems - one lesson learnt.
What might trigger the next meltdown? Who knows - and Kent doesn’t speculate - but perhaps that will come up in the speech Q&A. (US elections from 5 November, sadly, may be the next big market challenge.)
Albanese: ‘When people fire on Israel, Israel has a right to defend itself’
The interview moves on.
Q: The US State Department overnight said that Israeli incursions to degrade Hezbollah infrastructure [the US supports that], do you?
Anthony Albanese:
I support Israel’s right to defend itself. We’ve done that from the very beginning. But I also, along with all of the G7 nations, including the United States, including us – we were part of the statement of 13 countries, the United States, Australia, Canada, Japan, the European Union, as well as Saudi Arabia and the UAE, we have said that there needs to be a deescalation.
They called for a ceasefire in order to have peace in that Israeli Lebanon border, and they call for the implementation of the UN Security Council resolution that was carried on.
Q: Just to clarify, or do you support the US position…
Albanese:
We have supported, always supported, the same position as the United States have put here. And the United States have consistently said that there needs to be an agreement, and there were negotiations with Israel and Hezbollah prior to the current escalation, and you need a deescalation in order to have a diplomatic solution.
If you don’t say that that’s the case are you saying that this conflict should just continue to escalate ad infinitum with no end?
….Now we support Israel’s right to defend itself, and how it defends itself matters.
So we have always said that from the very beginning, from October 8, I said that on the Insiders program, and we did that in the resolution that was carried in the parliament that I moved.
Q: Just is that contradictory?
Albanese:
It’s the same position that the G7 countries have had. It’s the same position that everyone in terms of world leaders, it’s the same position that Keir Starmer in the UK have said, that President Biden in the United States has said, that all of our allies and partners who we work with have said, that they want a deescalation of this conflict, that they want a ceasefire that enables Israel to continue to exist with security. Now, Israel is taking this action because there isn’t security there, and when people fire on Israel, Israel has a right to defend itself.
Anthony Albanese during question time in parliament today. Photograph: Mick Tsikas/AAP
In case it needs to be made clear, voters decide their preferences in the voting booth.
Political parties can make suggestions and list the order they would like their supporters to place candidates in particular races, and there is evidence that some voters, particularly those considered “rusted-on”, do follow those how-to-vote cards.
But there are also large numbers of people who make their own decisions and the political parties just have to see where those votes end up.
Much like accepting a vote of someone voted into the parliament, politicians have no choice but to accept what voters decide to do in terms of preferences. You cannot reject a vote (although sometimes political parties will send one of their own out of the chamber to offset a vote, which makes a point but doesn’t alter the voting record) and you cannot reject a voter’s preferences.
Albanese reiterates goal of Labor in majority government
Back to the Sky News interview, Anthony Albanese is asked:
If you’ve given your view of the Greens and you believe that many of their views are repugnant, how do you accept preferences from them?
(That sound you hear is psephologists around the nation screaming.)
Anthony Albanese:
Well, I don’t accept preferences – people go into polling booths and put numbers next to names. So the preference allocation, of course, will be done by the organisational wing.
I make it very clear, as occurred when I was deputy prime minister in 2013 under Kevin Rudd, that there were no deals done.
That was a minority parliament, no deals were done in 2013 and I certainly am seeking to be prime minister of governing in my own right …with a majority, I want people to vote [No 1] Labor.
There is something called One Nation whose views on race are pretty repugnant as well.
Albanese says ‘no deals with the Greens’ even in minority government
The prime minister is sitting down for an interview with Sky News ahead of his trip to Laos. It is focused on Australia’s position on Israel and the Greens:
Q: The leaders of two peak Jewish groups have written to you and the opposition leader, urging you to preference each other above the Greens, given their repugnant position on the Middle East, would you consider that?
Anthony Albanese:
Well, of course, preferences will be done by the organisation, but I make this point, or a few points here.
One is, the only reason why the Greens are in the Queensland Parliament is because the LNP chose to put them there to give them preferences.
My objective, of course, is to lead, on an ongoing basis, the majority Labor government. That is what we will do.
The LNP in Queensland, in the election that’s underway at the moment, talking and giving preferences to One Nation above the Labor Party. I find that extraordinary, and that contradicts something that began under John Howard of putting One Nation last.
Q: You said it’s a matter for the party, and it is, but it’s also a matter for moral leadership, isn’t it? Would you consider doing that, and also in terms of the preferences, but also in terms of the minority government, if we do end up in that situation, would you rule out bringing in the Greens in any way, given what you yourself believe, their views on the Middle East are repugnant? They’re accusing you of being complicit in genocide.
Albanese:
Absolutely, I rule that out. I’m the only candidate for prime minister seeking a government in our own right, and there’ll be no deals with the Greens. I want a majority Labor government, and the best way that that can be achieved is by people voting Labor in the election when it’s held.
Unlike the Coalition that seem to have – they, of course, are a coalition themselves, with the Liberals and the Nationals, often having different objectives – and they seem to have written off a range of the seats that they’ve held historically, don’t seem to be even campaigning in them or trying to appeal to voters in those seats.
Albanese details Asean summit agenda as he prepares to depart
Anthony Albanese:
I will be heading to Laos attend meetings of the East Asia Summit. While there, I will be meeting with Chinese Premier Li, building on the patient, delivered and calibrated work that this government has in stabilising the relationship with China.
They will also be bilateral meetings with the prime ministers of Canada, New Zealand, Vietnam, the president of the Republic of Korea as well as meeting for the first time with new prime ministers. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba … I congratulate him in his election as a prime minister of Japan, that is a critical relationship and I rang him and had a good conversation with him initially, the relationship which in Japan is not just an economic one but increasingly one that’s important for our national security cooperation as well.
As well, I’ll be meeting the new prime minister of Thailand as well as having other meetings with leaders from our region.
The economy and national security will be the focus of the meetings.
Peter Dutton adds his “travel well, be successful” team Australia message and the chamber moves on.
Morning question time is even more unhinged than afternoon question time, it seems.
It ends with everyone annoyed. The prime minister is now giving a speech on indulgence about his upcoming trip to the Asean conference (which he is leaving for in a matter of hours).
Burke challenges opposition over confidence in security agencies
Tony Burke continues that answer after a point of order that was not a point of order. He is very fired up:
The guarantee of the government gets, and the guarantee in our security agencies. is the same guarantee [the] leader of the opposition would have given when he [oversaw] on visitor visas 4,994 people from Iraq, controlled by its Islamic State, described to other people who stood here as a death cult.
It’s the same guarantee the leader of the opposition would have given when he held my job about the 1,505 people he [took] in from Syria on visitor visas.
The same guarantee of the leader of the opposition would have given with respect to 864 people who came here from the Palestinian territories.
If you want to be on the side of the chamber, and you don’t have confidence in our security agencies, say so.
Because this government has confidence in our security agencies and those opposite, those opposite are now wanting to demand a whole lot of examples which, [if] tested against their record, they would fail.
Can the prime minister guarantee his government has not granted a visa to any individual … [who] has links to a terrorist organisation?
Tony Burke takes this one as well:
I said earlier in terms of terrorist organisations that I didn’t want to add to the words of Mike Burgess or bury them, I have the quotes, I will read it directly:
‘If you think terrorism is OK, if you think the destruction of the state of Israel is OK, if you think Hamas and what they did on 7 October is OK, I can tell you that is not OK and from security assessment point of view you will not pass muster.’
That is the test, that is a security test provided. The members [asks] what guarantee can be provided? I tell you the guarantee is the guarantee of our security agencies being responsible and a government that has confidence in them.
Which I might say is the same guarantee the leader of the opposition would have provided with respect to 1991 people coming from Taliban controlled Afghanistan.
Liberals continue visa attacks over Palestinian artist
Dan Tehan asks:
Prime minister, does supporting Hamas pass the character test for an Australian visa?
Tony Burke:
The question is with respect to character and different flags put forward by Asio which have been answered by Mike Burgess clearly.
I am not going to change a word of what has been said with respect to that.
Tehan then asks:
The Albanese government granted a visa to Fayez Elhasani, linked to Hamas and Islamic Palestinian jihad. Can the prime minister guarantee that his government is not granting visas to any other individuals from the war zone who have links to listed terrorist organisations? I give the call to the Leader of the House.
Burke looks pretty fed up by now and says:
There are seven or eight different ways of asking the same question so I guess we get the same answer again. Which is to say that our security agencies never stop collecting information, never stop collecting information and it is exactly as it should be.
And when people first apply for a visa, the movement best represents the information they already had, the different alerts that can be resolved in an Asio referral.
Speaker calls for order after continual opposition interjections
Milton Dick again has to tell the opposition to shut it, after even more interjections during a dixer. He calls out Paul Fletcher for “yelling” which he says, again “is disrespectful”.
This is the last QT the prime minister will be at this week, and it is the last QT until the first week of November, so everyone is feeling a bit rowdy.
Burke says visa concellations relating to Gaza to date have been offshore
The Liberal’s Julian Leeser takes the next non-government question and asks:
Have any of the tourist visas granted to those coming from the terrorist-controlled Gaza war zone since 7 October 2023 been cancelled?
Tony Burke also takes this one:
I will deal with the question into parts.
Specifically first with reference to the issue of visa cancellations. Secondly with the concept of visas coming from war zones.
First of all with respect to cancellations, the situation is the same as what I last advised parliament which is some cancellations have occurred and may well occur offshore but that does not change the fact that the government, the security agencies never stopped collecting information.
As has happened, no matter who is in government, and we continue to conduct various checks on people who have visas whether they are onshore or offshore.
Specific to the question, the cancellations so far have been offshore.
On the issue which has been raised in the preface to the question and raised a number of times in this house, is about the use of visitor visas for people coming from war zones.
Because when the people from Syria who came on humanitarian visas were separately interviewed, there’s been a presumption that they were the only people that came from the war zone during that time.
It is to be remembered that during the period those opposite were in office and a large portion of that, the leader of the opposition was the chief minister in charge of these programs – Afghanistan, large portions of which were controlled by the Taliban, did they put a ban on visitor visas from Afghanistan?
No – 1,991 visitor visas [were] granted from Afghanistan during that period.
From Iraq and Syria, during the period that Islamic State controlled large parts of Iraq and Syria, did they put a ban on visitor visas in the region?
No. Over 4,000 visitors [from the region], 1,500 by visitors from Syria.
And similarly, during the entire period where the Gaza Strip was controlled by Hamas, 864 visitor visas from the Palestinian territory.
