Senate suspends Richard Di Natale for calling Barry O'Sullivan 'a pig' –as it happened

I missed this a little earlier, but it is absolutely worth noting

Richard Di Natale on his suspension:

For months my female colleagues have endured sexist language that would be unfit in any context, let alone parliament. I won’t repeat the remark he made about a parliamentary colleague. Sexualised commentary towards women further disgraces a parliament that’s already held in contempt by much of the community. We have seen a pattern of reprehensible behaviour that has gone on for months. Simply withdrawing an offensive statement does not undo the damage done.

Our parliament already fails women on a daily basis. How can we expect to attract more female representatives when it has become a toxic and unsafe workplace for women? We desperately need to change the standard of representation in our chamber.

The foreign donation ban has passed the parliament.

Julie Bishop is in Sydney giving a speech on leadership and energy, and, of course, she has been asked about her former benchmate Julia Banks and her defection to the crossbench.

“I think the basic policies of the government are very good,” Christopher Pyne says. “I am sorry that Julia [Banks] doesn’t agree with all those policies. That is what it is like being in a team. You can’t always get your own way.

“Julia has now chosen to sit on the crossbenches, that is a matter for her.”

David Speers reminds Pyne that, when Cory Bernardi left, he referred to him as a “Liberal party rat”.

“Julia Banks is a friend of mine and I regard her very highly. I am disappointed with her decision. I wouldn’t be human if I wasn’t disappointed with her decision.

“I look forward to her support of the government from the crossbenches and I hope that she might decide to return to the Liberal party and to the government in the fullness of time, because I think we have every chance of winning the election next year.

“The fundamentals are good. And of course the alternative is a Bill Shorten prime ministership, a high taxing government that will crush the economic growth that we have and induce a recession.”

But what happens now?

Business as usual, says Pyne.

Christopher Pyne just had a chat to Sky about this moment:

Sarah Hanson-Young’s speech:

As the person in this chamber whom the reprehensible and disgusting comments were directed to by Senator O’Sullivan, I want to make it very clear that I am thankful to Senator Di Natale for standing up and calling them out.

That is what real men do. Real men don’t insult and threaten women, and they don’t slut-shame them and they don’t attack them and make them feel bullied in their workplace.

I have sat in this chamber for weeks and weeks – months – and heard the disgusting slurs and attacks coming from a particular group in this place. And I, for one, am sick of it, and I know many of my female colleagues on all sides of politics are sick of it, too. And I will name you because you are not fit to be in this chamber, you’re not fit to represent your constituents and you’re not fit to call yourselves men: Senator O’Sullivan, Senator Anning, Senator Bernardi and Senator Leyonhjelm.

You day after day come into this place, hurl insults across this chamber and play the gender card and, the moment anyone stands up to you, you have the most fragile glass jaws of all. You are cowards. Every time you get called out, you refuse to stand by it.

(There are many interjections and Penny Wong stands up)

Penny Wong:

This has already degenerated, I think, to a standard that is not what people should expect ... No, I’m actually trying to defend her against being yelled at. So I would ask those opposite – I know that this is a difficult debate but perhaps we can let Senator Hanson-Young finish and, if government senators wish to respond, they can. So could we try and maintain some dignity in a very difficult time? I have not, in the time I have been here, seen the motion passed that we have just passed, so perhaps we can all reflect soberly on the fact that we’ve just had to do that.

Hanson-Young:

Thank you, Senator Wong. I stand by the decision of our leader, Richard Di Natale. He uttered the words that Senator O’Sullivan was a pig. He was asked to withdraw and he has refused. I back him in that.

However, I do reflect on what Senator Wong has just called for, and that is a little more decorum in this place.

Penny Wong on why Labor supported the suspension of Richard Di Natale:

That was a most regrettable set of circumstances and I just want to make clear the position that the opposition takes in relation to these matters. I have no doubt as to the offensiveness of the words that were allegedly spoken by Senator O’Sullivan ... all right, I’m happy to say that they were spoken.

Our position on this motion does not reflect at all a view that that was appropriate. I am advised – obviously I’ve only just come into the chamber – that Senator O’Sullivan was asked to withdraw, and he did.

As a party of government, we have always made clear, often in difficult circumstances such as today, that in opposition and in government we support the procedures of the Senate and have always supported rulings of the president of the day.

It is clear from the advice that I was provided that Senator Di Natale was given an opportunity to withdraw by the Senate and refused to do so.

In those circumstances – and we would apply this across the chamber –the opposition is left with no option but to support the chair in their reasonable exercise of standing orders.

I do make clear again that nothing in the opposition’s actions today in any way endorses the statement that was made by Senator O’Sullivan in this chamber, which I and the opposition regard as reprehensible.

For a palate cleanser, something lovely did happen in this building today.

Or rather, on top of it.

The Endeavour Foundation made Capalaba man Joshua Ball’s dream come true this morning, as part of its “Imagine What’s Possible” competition, where people with an intellectual disability could win the chance to live their dream.

Josh wanted to “mow the lawn on top of Parliament House in Canberra wearing his hi-vis jacket and be told ‘well done’.”

And this morning, he got that chance.

Scott Morrison and Bill Shorten both came out to congratulate Josh this morning.

Kerin McMahon from the Endeavour Foundation said Josh’s dream also showed that workplaces have a lot to gain by hiring people like Josh.

“Josh’s experience shows, when we focus on ability, we can achieve our dreams and Endeavour Foundation urges employers to enrich workplaces by employing people with disability.”

Recapping those crazy few Senate minutes, it went something like this:

O’Sullivan: She didn’t turn up. She didn’t front. She didn’t turn up. It was her inquiry co-sponsored with the Australian Labor party and she didn’t turn up. There’s a bit of Nick Xenophon in her – and I don’t mean that to be a double reference – but there’s a bit of Xenophon in her, references committees and not attending.

President: Order! Senator O’Sullivan, I’m going to ask you to withdraw the comment.

O’Sullivan: I’ll withdraw the comment. There was no intention to offend anyone.

Di Natale: (can be heard yelling in the background – words include “he’s a disgrace” and “he’s a grub”)

President: Senator Di Natale, I asked the senator to withdraw. I’m going to ask him to withdraw unconditionally just to make it clear.

O’Sullivan: I’m more than happy to withdraw unconditionally because there was no intent.

President: Thank you. Senator Leyonhjelm.

Di Natale: You grub!

Leyonhjelm: Senator Di Natale and Senator Steele-John have both insulted and used unparliamentary language in relation to Senator O’Sullivan as well. They called him a pig, and other words which I am not going to repeat. I ask you to invite them to withdraw as well.

President: I heard Senator Di Natale. Senator Steele-John if you made an unparliamentary comment I ask you to withdraw it.

Steele-John: I withdraw

President: Senator Di Natale I ask you to withdraw your comments.

Di Natale: I will not withdraw.

President: Senator Di Natale I am asking you to withdraw your comments.

Di Natale: I will not withdraw.

President: I called Senator O’Sullivan to order and asked him to withdraw

Unidentified senator: He is a pig.

President: Senator O’Sullivan has unconditionally withdrawn, that sort of language is not appropriate in the Senate. I ask you to reflect upon that and I ask you to withdraw. To facilitate the operation of this debate and for the comity of the Senate you have the opportunity to address both this debate, and if you wish to address the behaviour of a senator there are other opportunities to do that. I ask you to withdraw

Di Natale: Mr President, we have endured on this side days of sexist filth coming from that man. He is a pig and he should consider and he should reflect on the standards he is adopting in this chamber.

President: Resume your seat. We are leaving me with no option Senate Di Natale.

(long pause for advice from clerk).

President: Senator Di Natale I will give you on least opportunity to reflect upon that and to withdraw your comments. If not, I will ask you to stand in your place and either explain your comments or apologise to the Senate and leave it to another Senate to take the matter into the hands of the Senate. There are other opportunities to address the behaviour of senators, Senator Di Natale.

(another long pause)

President: Well, if the Senate wishes to allow that behaviour to go unremarked, we will move on.

Ruston: I move that Senator Di Natale be suspended from the Senate.

Pauline Hanson says she is a woman and she was not offended by the comments. She also tries to say that Sarah Hanson-Young was not in the chamber when the comments were made.

That’s not true – I can see Hanson-Young on the tape.

Scott Ryan stands up immediately after and makes a speech, mentioning that this is the first time since the Howard government this procedure has been used. He asks that senators not only think about their remarks, but how they might be interpreted by someone who has a different life experience to them.

Right.

The Senate was debating a motion from Sarah Hanson-Young for the production of documents.

Barry O’Sullivan was standing against it.

As part of his speech, he said this:

“There’s a bit of Nick Xenophon in her, and I don’t mean that to be a double reference, but there’s a bit of Xenophon in her, references committees and not attending.”

He withdraws after Scott Ryan asks him to and says he didn’t mean to offend, and rejects the imputation of how the remarks were interpreted.

Richard Di Natale yells “it’s a disgrace” and “you are a grub”. Leyonhjelm complains and Jordon Steele-John withdraws, after he was also named.

Di Natale: “I will not withdraw ... Mr President, we have endured, on this side, days, of sexist filth coming from that man. He is a pig and he should consider and reflect on the standards he is adopting in this chamber.”

Sarah Hanson-Young has thanked Richard Di Natale for making a stand, which she says is what “real men” do.

She calls out Cory Bernardi, David Leyonhjelm, Barry O’Sullivan and Fraser Anning as “cowards”.

It’s a firebrand of a speech. I’ll bring you that one very soon as well.

I am going through the tape to see what Barry O’Sullivan said.

If he withdraws the comment, the suspension motion will be moot.

Di Natale will not withdraw.

The suspension only lasts until the end of the sitting day, fyi. Seems he has decided it is a price he is willing to pay, if the vote goes against him.

Because not enough is happening, a motion has just been put forward to suspend Richard Di Natale from the Senate, after he called Barry O’Sullivan “a pig”.

Di Natale heard a comment from O’Sullivan, which appeared to be directed at Sarah Hanson-Young – I didn’t catch it – and stood up and complained about the “sexist comments” directed towards his colleagues.

Then he called O’Sullivan “a pig” and hell broke loose.

A motion has just been put forward proposing a suspension of a senator. The Senate is dividing.

Helen Davidson, who was listening to the Home Affairs estimate hearing last month, was reminded of this exchange, after Scott Morrison told question time Peter Dutton did not have responsibility for cancelling visas.

“The majority of immigration and multicultural affairs decisions rest with minister David Coleman, however both Minister Dutton and myself have powers … given the large caseload the majority is with Minister Coleman so it is a shared responsibility,” assistant minister Linda Reynolds told Senate estimates in October.

She said there were no chartered letters shared yet to define responsibilities.

The department’s secretary, Mike Pezzullo, interjected that Coleman had the “heaviest burden” but all three were sworn in and could make decisions.

Dutton was still able to make ministerial interventions “as a matter of law and as a matter of the governor general’s swearing in”, in case of emergencies.

“So Minister Dutton could still intervene to let au pairs in at the airport,” said Labor senator Kim Carr.

Yes, was the begrudging answer.

Annnnnd question time ends. The government scatters.

Michael McCormack and Christopher Pyne share a moment over some procedural thing.

“We’re a team, we’re a team,” Pyne says.

McCormack throws his arm around him. Pyne throws his back in response.

I’m not sure anyone has told them yet that has become one of the omens of coming despair.

Labor leaves, and Julia Banks and Kerryn Phelps walk out together.

*end scene*

Scott Morrison is gathering his folders, so this is almost over.

Bob Katter has also not made it to this question time, for anyone keeping count.

“Oh what fun this is,” comes a message from the Coalition benches.

It is punctuated with the straight eyes, straight mouthed emoji face, if that helps with context.

Christopher Pyne has headed to the seat next to the prime minister and is having a chat, while Paul Fletcher pretends someone is listening to him.

I suppose he’s right. The Hansard reporters have no choice.

Shayne Neumann comes up with the next question for Scott Morrison and it is the most animated the backbench has been all week.

“Who is that guy?” comes from the government benches.

Neumann:

I refer to revelations in the media that the minister for home affairs’ ability to cancel criminal visas is being challenged in the federal court because of serious doubts about his eligibility under section 44 of the constitution. Given that all sides of politics support cancelling the visas of dangerous criminals and deporting them, will the prime minister now refer the minister for home affairs to the high court to remove any doubt over the minister’s decisions?

Morrison:

I’m asked about cancellation of visas by the member. I can inform the House ... that the minister for home affairs does not have responsibility for cancelling of visas.

That power is actually held by the minister for immigration, citizenship and multicultural affairs. So, the shadow minister ... may wish to pay attention to when ... I’m asked about cancellation of visas, because it is true, Mr Speaker, it is very true, absolutely true, that this government has cancelled the visas of 3,000 criminals, Mr Speaker...

He continues, until Tony Burke asks about relevance.

Tony Smith gives some leeway.

Morrison returns to the despatch box and starts talking about visas he has cancelled.

Everyone is back in their assigned seats in the crossbench but the chats are continuing.

Julia Banks is getting more contact from Kerryn Phelps and Cathy McGowan in this hour than she has from the entire government since the leadership spill (Julie Bishop and Craig Laundy aside).

So much has happened today, Labor is only just getting to Julie Bishop’s comments published in the Fin this morning about wanting the government to work with Labor on the Neg.

Bill Shorten to Scott Morrison:

Is the prime minister aware that at a time of record-high power bills and record-low wages growth, the former deputy leader of the Liberal party has called on the prime minister to work with Labor on the national energy guarantee, saying, ‘The government needs to consider energy policy through the prism of securing bipartisan agreement with Labor to establish a long-term, stable, regulatory framework that will support private sector investment’?

Why won’t the prime minister take the sage advice of the member for Curtin and work with Labor on energy policy he’s previously said he supports?

Morrison looks the happiest he has been since walking into the chamber:

He talks about the carbon tax and how Labor can’t be trusted on the economy, and it’s almost like old times, when he was a treasurer in a majority government, who didn’t have to take responsibility for every single screw up.

The Greens have responded to the deal Labor and the government have made, which Paul Karp filled you in on, a little bit ago:

The Australian Greens are extremely disappointed by reports that the government has done a deal with the ALP that will mean newly arrived migrants will have to wait four years before they can access working aged payments like Newstart.

“The ALP have condemned newly arrived migrants who can’t find work to poverty,” Senator Rachel Siewert said.

“This is an outrageous attack on our multicultural community and I’m frankly surprised that members of the Labor party thinks it’s OK for people to come to our country and basically receive no support when they need it.

“Australia is a multicultural society, many people in the parliament are migrants or the children of migrants.”

Senator Nick McKim said: “The Australian people have comprehensively rejected the politics of fear and division.

“People who have decided to make their lives here deserve the support of the wider community.

“Migrants should be encouraged to take part in our society, not punished and forced into poverty because of political games.”

Kerryn Phelps has joined Rebehka Sharkie, with both crossbenchers now sitting with Julia Banks as Greg Hunt pretends he is not a broken man and everything is totally fine.

Part of Scott Morrison’s answer to Brendan O’Connor’s earlier question on wage growth (with a cheeky reference to one of Julia Banks’s quotes from her party resignation speech) was an attack on Labor and national security.

Last week, I announced and will be introducing the legislation into this place this week to ensure that if there is a radical Islamic terrorist or any terrorist of that nature, Mr Speaker, who has, who has, we believe, another citizenship, we will strip their citizenship away from them, Mr Speaker.

You would never have got those policies from the Labor party. Because the Labor party subcontracted out national security policy to the Coalition on every single occasion.

They happily might, on occasion, follow us, Mr Speaker, but, when it comes to keeping Australians safe, Labor is never in the lead.

They are always trailing along behind, often making excuses, but sometimes turning up to the event to ensure that we can keep Australians safe. But we’ll also be putting in place the exclusion orders as well. They’re our policies, Mr Speaker.

Which seems an odd way to encourage bipartisanship for a minority government.

Kelly O’Dwyer is asked, by Tanya Plibersek, if she agrees with herself:

“That this Liberal government is widely seen as, and I quote, ‘homophobic, anti-women climate change deniers’ and does she also agree with the independent member for Chisholm, who told the House earlier today, ‘Equal representation of men and women in this parliament is an urgent imperative which will create culture change?’

Rebekha Sharkie has moved to the seat next to Julia Banks and is chatting quietly to her. The two women look like they are at an entirely different event, to be honest.

O’Dwyer attempts to avoid the question by talking about the women’s economic security statement.

Plibersek comes up with a point of order:

“The minister still hasn’t told us whether she agrees with herself.”

Tony Smith dismisses the point, and O’Dwyer keeps talking about the economic security statement.

The government’s bad day continues – it seems to have messed up a vote in the Senate on their road safety bill, allowing Janet Rice’s amendment to pass. If you need a lol, take a look at the last point:

But the Senate notes that:

(a) the Ministerial Forum on Vehicle Emissions was established in October 2015 to address emissions from motor vehicles;
(b) the Draft Regulation Impact Statement on Vehicle emissions standards for cleaner air released by the Ministerial Forum notes that:
(i) Australia is estimated to have experienced a 68 per cent increase in deaths
attributable to air pollution during the period 2005 to 2010, with total of 1,483
deaths in 2010; and
(ii) it is suggested that, in OECD countries, road transport accounts for
approximately half of the cost of the health impact of air pollution (including
these preventable deaths);
(c) while the Prime Minister insists that we will meet our Paris targets ‘in a canter’, the transport sector is now responsible for 19 per cent of Australian greenhouse gas emissions and has continued to grow in emissions year on year since 2001;
(d) despite two discussion papers, three draft regulation impact statements, two additional reports and over three years of work, there has been no substantive government action to reduce emissions from motor vehicles; and
(e) the government has proven itself completely unable to deliver meaningful reductions in vehicle emissions and therefore cannot be trusted to reduce deaths from vehicle pollution or meet our international climate change obligations.”

Probably not what the government was going for.

Brendan O’Connor to Scott Morrison:

The former Liberal and now independent member for Chisholm said that the policies of this government had changed. And she said, ‘largely due to the actions of the reactionary and regressive right wing who talk about and talk to themselves rather than listening to the people’.

Prime minister, when will this chaotic and divided Liberal government stop fighting itself and start listening to the Australian people, who are saying that everything is going up except their wages?

Morrison:

I’m asked about the government’s policies. That’s what I understand the question was about, the government’s policies ...

He goes on, talking about the government’s policies in the best version of his non-yelling voice.

The backbench seem to wish they were anywhere but here. I mean, me too, but for different reasons.

Michael McCormack opens his dixer with “life teaches us many lessons”, which might be one of the greatest examples of not reading the room we have seen yet.

A Labor source has just pointed out that of the five women who raised bullying allegations – Kelly O’Dwyer, Lucy Gichuhi, Julia Banks, Ann Sudmalis and Julie Bishop – only O’Dwyer is in the same position.

Gichuhi was pushed down the South Australian Senate ticket. Bishop resigned from the frontbench. Sudmalis said she would not contest the next election (her bullying complaint related to the branch) and Banks has quit.

Earlier this month, O’Dwyer said the investigation into the bullying allegations was ongoing but she was taking an active and personal interest in it.

When will we see any results of that investigation?

Well, that, no one knows.

Both Cathy McGowan and Kerryn Phelps turned around and spoke to Julia Bishop as that answer was read out.

They remain in conversation with her, making sure she is not alone as this goes on.

McGowan asks her something, Banks nods and then reaches for her phone.

Tanya Plibersek to Scott Morrison:

The former Liberal and now independent member for Chisholm today confirmed the coup against Malcolm Turnbull was led by, I quote, ‘Members. Reactionary right wing’, and was supported by MPs who traded their votes for personal ambition, saying, and I quote, ‘Their actions were undeniably for themselves, for their position in the party, their power, their personal ambition, not for the Australian people.’

Prime minister, the member for Chisholm has explained why Malcolm Turnbull is no longer prime minister. Why won’t you?

Christopher Pyne objects to the question immediately.

But he can barely hold it together, as Labor loses its mind at his intervention.

He says that Morrison is not responsible for Julia Banks’s comments.

Tony Burke says it goes to Turnbull not being prime minister anymore.

Tony Smith allows it.

Morrison:

I refer members to my earlier answer to these questions. But I know the member for Chisholm would be very proud of the following things that our government is doing, and particularly the release of the women’s economic security statement, which has been announced by the minister.

He goes on, reading from a highlighted piece of paper, mentioning what they have done since the election.

Ed Husic: “Stop, you had me after election.”

Again, takes me back to essay exams I had not studied for.

Adam Bandt has sent out a reminder notice for the “(ever growing) crossbench Christmas party”.

It’s Josh Frydenberg’s turn to pretend everything is fine.

“Last time you were talking, one of your members quit,” Tim Watts yells out.

“Do another video Josh,” someone else says.

While the Labor benches live like it’s heckle Christmas, the government benches are largely silent. There are hands on faces, heads in phones and a lot of busy work going on at those desks.

Bill Shorten to Scott Morrison:

When Malcolm Turnbull was prime minister, the government had a majority in the parliament. The members for Wentworth and Chisholm were government members. The government was backing the national energy guarantee and was considering Labor’s national integrity commission.

So, I repeat, why isn’t Malcolm Turnbull still the prime minister of Australia?

Morrison:

The former prime minister lost the support of the Liberal party room. That’s what happened. That’s what happened. And I was elected to lead the Liberal party. That’s why I’m here. There you go. It’s a pretty simple answer.

And it’s the most honest one we have heard from him yet. He may not have started the fire (it was always burning, since the world was turning) but he’s doing a very good impression of the “this is fine” cartoon dog, as the house burns down around him.

Morrison:

They were failures in government last time. They’ll be failures in government if they ever get the opportunity again, Mr Speaker. The big revolutionary changes that this leader of the opposition wants to wreak on the Australian economy, with $200bn in higher taxes, the biggest wet blanket ever thrown on an economy in generations, Mr Speaker, that is the design of the leader of the Labor party.

A leader of the Labor party who’s union-bred, union-led, union-fed, Mr Speaker. A Labor party that will take us back to the industrial relations activities of the 1970s. That’s not the future of the Australian economy. This leader of the Labor party is an old Labor throwback.

Luke Howarth got the first dixer. The backbench is making the “hear hear” on cue, but it doesn’t seem like its heart is in it.

The Labor party is ensuring it takes advantage of every moment – it has sent out a fundraising plea for its Chisholm candidate, Jennifer Yang:

I’m writing to you because I’m Labor’s candidate for Chisholm at the next federal election, and I need your help.

You might have just heard the news that the Liberal member for Chisholm, Julia Banks, has defected from the Liberal party and has joined the crossbench.

This means that the government is yet another vote short of a majority government and Scott Morrison’s hold of parliament looks increasingly shaky.

We could go to an election at any moment and we need to be ready.

The seat of Chisholm is one of the most marginal seats in the country and it’s firmly within Labor’s grasp. Daniel Andrews’s win on the weekend shows that.

I want to be a strong and effective member for Chisholm in a Shorten Labor government but we need your help.

Every dollar you give will support our federal election campaign by helping us to fund the advertisements, print materials, and field and online campaign.

The wheels are coming off this government and it’s only a matter of time before we’re in a federal election period.

We can’t take any results for granted because Australia can’t take another three years of an out-of-touch Liberal government who’s only about the top end of town, not the issues that matter to everyday people.

I hope we can count on your support,

Jennifer Yang

Labor’s candidate for Chisholm

Before question time, Scott Morrison and Bill Shorten will make statements, on indulgence, on the passing of Bonita Mabo.

From Lorena Allam’s report:

Tributes are flowing for the “matriarch of reconciliation”, Bonita Mabo, an activist and reconciliation advocate in her own right who was the wife of the land rights champion Eddie “Koiki” Mabo. She has died in Townsville, surrounded by her family, at the age of 85.

The Aboriginal social justice commissioner, June Oscar, described Mabo as “gentle, stoic and loving. I will always remember her as the mother of native title. Her legacy lives on in our continuing fight for land and sea rights.”

Australia’s South Sea Islander community said: “Aunty Bonita’s contribution to social justice and human rights for First Nations people and the Australian South Sea Islander recognition was monumental and relentless.”

That was quite the entrance.

Julia Banks has entered the chamber, from the Labor side, with Kerryn Phelps, Rebekha Sharkie and Cathy McGowan at her side.

The women flanked Banks, escorting her to her new seat at the back of the crossbench. Phelps, sitting in front, reached over to Banks once she had sat down.

Julie Bishop is not in the chamber. She has a speech in Sydney tonight and I am not sure if that is the reason for her absence.

Andrew Laming also appears to have forgotten how microphones work.

Or, the gee up meeting was about taking a page out of the prime minister’s book, where the louder you are the better you think you’re doing.

Apparently.

Scott Morrison has walked into the chamber with his frontbench.

Looks like Nola Marino called a meeting to help with the gee-up.

It is time for who is that MP.

And it is Craig Kelly.

From how loud he is speaking, I am not sure he is quite across how a microphone works.

And, given how often he appears on Sky, this is surprising.

It’s almost question time – I am headed into the chamber.

Let me know how you think the hour will play out below the line

David Speers is asking Michael Keenan if, given everything that has happened, that the Liberal party should go to the Australian people and say “we’ve got it wrong”.

Keenan says he doesn’t think “it is that useful for us to be talking about our internal politics”.

Three or four times with the same question – do you think it will be useful to show some contrition, given how it has all turned out – Keenan doesn’t think there is any point in saying sorry. (Despite, even Justin Bieber saying sorry for being Justin Bieber.)

That is the third time you have asked me the same question, I am not going to be drawn into a conversation about history and I am not going to sit here and make the mistake of talking about internal Liberal party politics.

I actually don’t think that people in my electorate are terribly interested in that. They want to know what we are going to do to drive their power prices down, what we are going to do to improve the opportunities for their children, how we are going to keep the economy growing, how we are going to keep job opportunities flowing.

These are the things that matter. I don’t think we should be distracted by a discussion about internal party politics.

So apparently a prime minister change just three months ago is “history” and losing a government MP while already a minority government is “internal party politics”.

Good chat.

Michael Keenan just described today as “part of the colour and movement you sometimes get in politics”.

Which may be my favourite spin of this situation I have heard yet.

The Petrie MP says Julia Banks has been “feeling down” since the leadership spill.

I think people, I have said hi to her, tried to reach out to her – I think maybe, perhaps, we should be looking at our own pastoral care in situations like this and trying to look after our members better.

But Julia has been sitting next to Julie Bishop in the parliament too, who was our deputy leader for many, many years, so I find it a little ...

I tried to give Julie a call before I came on ... I still think Julia Banks is a grown woman and I think Julie has been a great and still is, as a backbencher, a great supporter of the Liberal party and has done great things for the party and would have encouraged her to stay I am sure.

He is not angry at Banks.

No I am not. I think Julia Banks is a good, decent person, she’s obviously been upset since the change and I think she has made her decision and I think that is the right decision for her, and I respect her decision.

He thinks it would be outrageous for anyone to say “good riddance”.

She has already voted to support Peter Dutton when she was in the government. Even if she did that and changed her position, I would still respect her position and not say a bad word about her. I think this is above politics and she has made a decision.

Luke Howarth had the bad luck to be scheduled for a Sky panel, just after Julia Banks announcement.

So he became the first government MP to respond.

He says this is a stable government.

“Because ultimately ... we’ve got 74 seats, Labor has got 69, there are six independents there, two or three, or perhaps four of them, have been in the Liberal party before in some way or had links, so they will make their decision as they best see fit,” he says. “Those independents are adults and can make a decision as they see best fits them.”

Reminded that during Julia Gillard’s time leading a minority government the Liberal party demanded an election, Howarth says:

“Look we have six months to go until the next election, there will be an election, the timeline has been mapped out, it will be in May, we know that we will have a budget in April.

“The Australian people want stability, they’ll find this interesting, but the fact is they want the parliament to go full term and they want us to get on with the job.”

Does he feel like the government is falling apart?

“No I don’t, surprisingly.”

In other developments from the Labor caucus, Labor decided to oppose Senator Rex Patrick’s private member’s bill to improve parliamentary oversight of intelligence services.

After a report to the contrary, Bill Shorten and Pat Dodson reiterated Labor’s commitment to an Indigenous Voice to parliament.

Dodson said this included “legislating and entrenching” the body in the constitution, a Makarata treaty and truth telling.

In his speech to caucus, Shorten said the Victorian election result was “remarkable” and predicted the Morrison government would get “increasingly desperate”.

Shorten criticised Scott Morrison for describing the national integrity commission as a “fringe issue” and said the prime minister had “tried to take credit for Dan Andrews’s victory” adding “that might be partly true, but not in the way he meant”.

Responding to Morrison saying the next election would be between him and Shorten, the opposition leader said that Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull had said the same thing and “if Mathias Cormann could count that’s what Peter Dutton would have said”.

Just a quick note on numbers.

An absolute majority of 76 is still required for something like a vote of no confidence.

But an absolute majority is not required to refer Peter Dutton to the high court over s44 concerns.

My House spies tell me procedures on high court referrals were adjusted late last year, because the government wanted the option of being able to pursue hostile referrals.

This means the numbers are there now, assuming Banks votes to refer.

But I’ve made some quick inquiries and it’s not Labor’s intention, at least right at this moment, to refer Dutton to the high court this afternoon.

I’m not sure why they aren’t accelerating but Dutton is not in parliament this week, having sustained an arm injury.

The Labor caucus has approved a deal with the Coalition on its bill to increase wait times for welfare for newly arrived migrants.

The finance minister, Mathias Cormann, has issued a statement explaining the deal.
From 1 January 2019 the waiting period for newly arrived residents will be:

• four years for working-age payments, such as Newstart allowance and concession cards, such as the low-income healthcare card
• two years for carer payment, parental leave pay and dad and partner pay (down from three years in the original bill), and
• one-year for carer allowance and family tax benefit part A.

There will be no wait period for family tax benefit B.

Cormann:

The changes support the Australian government’s goal to improve the sustainability of the welfare system and encourage greater self-reliance where it is fair and reasonable to do so.

The increased waiting periods reflect the nature of these payments and capacity of skilled and family migrants who come to Australia to work or to be with family, who should be self-reliant during their initial settlement period. These changes also make sure the support is there for those who need it most.

Providing a moment of levity – watching journalists and politicians attempting to do maths live on air.

So how bad is it, for the government?

Pretty damn bad.

Julia Banks has just become the government’s own Lady Vengeance.

Her resignation usurped Scott Morrison’s attempt to reset the government with his surplus budget announcement.

She has robbed the government of another number in the same week it was facing its first test as a minority government, with Kerryn Phelps joining the crossbench.

Her move to the crossbench gives Labor the opportunity it has been looking for to refer Peter Dutton to the high court under section 44 concerns.

Banks has already told the parliament she wants action on Nauru. We know she also wants a national integrity commission. The government now has to work with her to get its legislation through the parliament, for as long as the parliament sits before the next election.

And that’s if she does stay beyond the end of the year.

“In the new year, I will make a decision about my future career path,” she said.

I’m sure all of those who sparked the leadership spill are really patting themselves on their back right now.

Meanwhile, at the Nationals:

Holy moly.

Given the “bombshell in the House now” messages flying around just before Julia Banks got to her feet, she had told a few people of her intentions. I am not sure, given the timing of Scott Morrison and Josh Frydenberg’s press conference, if the leader was among them.

Does this change next year’s plan? Who knows. Truly – who the hell would know?

If Peter Dutton and Chris Crewther are referred to the high court – and there was some talk before all of this that Banks may join Labor and the crossbench in referring at least Dutton – there is not a lot of chance the high court will make any decision much before May anyway.

And we know that until the high court makes it determinations, the MP might resign from the ministry (might, not all have) but remains in parliament.

But it does make for a soupy mess of a parliament to attempt to govern. At this stage, I couldn’t even say whether anyone could guarantee the sittings, as scheduled for next week, will definitely go ahead.

Dutton, after ripping his bicep off his bone while mending a fence, has medical leave until next week. He is paired, with Labor, as is convention.

But next week?

Who. The. Hell. Knows.

Any bets on who might be next to join her on the crossbench?

Julia Banks has posted her statement to her website (she has already removed Liberal branding from her website from the looks of things)

Following the leadership coup in August I announced my decision that I will not recontest the seat of Chisholm at the next election as a member of the Liberal party.

I’ve always put the People before the Party. After being a Labor-held seat for 18 years – the people of Chisholm elected me as I promised them that I would be their representative under the leadership of the former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull and former deputy leader and foreign minister Julie Bishop. Both visionary, inspiring leaders of sensible centrist liberal values with integrity, intellect and with significant support from my local community and across Australia, as leaders of our nation.

The gift of time and reflection has provided some clarity regarding the brutal blow against the leadership. Led by members of the reactionary right wing, the coup was aided by many MPs trading their vote for a leadership change in exchange for their individual promotion, preselection endorsements or silence. Their actions were undeniably for themselves. For their position in the party. Their power. Their personal ambition. Not for the Australian people who we represent. Not for what people voted for in the 2016 election. Not for stability. And disregarding that teamwork and unity delivers success.

The aftermath of those dark days in August then acutely laid bare the major parties’ obstructionist and combative actions and internal games. All for political point-scoring rather than for timely, practical sensible decisions on matters which Australians care about.

Equal representation of men and women in this parliament is an urgent imperative which will create a culture change. There’s the blinkered rejection of quotas and support of the ‘merit myth’ but this is more than a numbers game. Across both major parties the level of regard and respect for women in politics is years behind the business world. There is also a clear need for an independent and whistleblower system as found in many workplaces to enable reporting of misconduct of those in power without fear of reprisal or retribution. Often when good women ‘call out’ or are subjected to bad behaviour – the reprisals, backlash and commentary portrays them as the bad ones; the liar, the troublemaker, emotionally unstable or weak, or someone who should be silenced. To those who say politics is not for the faint-hearted and that women have to ‘toughen up’ – I say this: the hallmark characteristics of the Australian woman (and I’ve met thousands of them) be they in my local community, in politics, business, the media and sport – are resilience and a strong authentic independent spirit.

The voice of the Australian people has been loud and clear. Hundreds from my local community as well as hundreds more from across Australia contacted me with their support and (knowing that my life from humble and hardworking migrant heritage has been in the business real world and not as a career politician ) many pleaded that I stay in politics and become an independent representative. My sensible centrist values, belief in economic responsibility and focus on always putting the people first and acting in the nation’s interest have not changed. The Liberal party has changed. Largely due to the actions of the reactionary and regressive right wing who talk to themselves rather than listening to the people.

To continue to put the People before the Party and act in the nation’s interest authentically and constructively – effective immediately I will serve as a member of House of Representatives as an independent representative. I intend to give the government my assurance as to confidence and supply. In the new year, I will make a decision about my future career path. Like the three female independent representatives – the new member for Wentworth, the member for Mayo and the member for Indi – sensible centre liberal values are at the core of what I stand for.

As a result of this political journey I am grateful to have met so many wonderful people from across the political divide who I know will respect my decision and with whom I hope I will have enduring friendships. I am so proud to serve as a member of the House of Representatives with honour and respect because of the good people it represents. The people that the major parties have stopped listening to. The Australian People.”

In her speech, Julia Banks said she saw people trade their vote for advancement, during the leadership spill.

I am working on getting you the entire speech.

Just to recap the last five minutes:

Scott Morrison all but announced the election would be in May, shifting the budget to 2 April.

Julia Banks has quit the government and moved to the crossbench.

The news broke as Morrison was doing his budget announcement – he motored out of there very, very quickly as journalists began shouting questions about Banks.

But the government has lost another guaranteed vote for things like suspending standing orders, referrals and legislation.

You can bet your bottom dollar that Peter Dutton’s high court referral (and Chris Crewther) will be back on the agenda tomorrow.

Liberal MP Julia Banks is giving a personal statement in the House of Representatives, stating she will move to the crossbench and become an independent.

She said she will continue to give Scott Morrison’s government confidence and supply and make a decision in the new year about whether to recontest her seat.

Banks noted that many constituents urged her to stay in politics after she announced she would not recontest the next election for the Liberals.

Banks says her personal commitment to liberal values has not changed, “the Liberal party has changed”.

She blames the “reactionary right wing” who she said talk to and about themselves rather than the Australian people.

Julia Banks is emotional as she delivers this speech.

Her defection takes the government’s numbers even further into minority. They hold 74 seats (I am still counting Kevin Hogan).

“Effective immediately I will be serving as an independent,” Banks says.

She says she will give the government confidence and supply

And here is your election platform:

What I said was we had been investing in infrastructure. We’d been investing in services.

We’d be ensuring we main tape our trajectory back to a surplus and that has always been a focus of our fiscal strategy in the last five years.

We’re achieving it. These improvements in our budget have not happened by accident, the decisions we’ve taken on spending where our spending growth has been at the lowest level of any government in 50 years.

We’ve exercised spending restraint. We’ve also emphasised restraint when it comes to taxes. Labor has released the brakes on taxes. So the next election is a choice between a stronger economy to pay for hospitals and services and education and schools and border protection and defence that Australia needs.”

For those looking at what Myefo will be saying, Paul Karp gave us a hint earlier this week:

A surge in company tax is expected to push budget revenue $9.2bn higher in 2018-19 than expected in the May budget, according to Deloitte Access Economics’ latest forecast.

The positive news sets the Morrison government up for a quicker return to surplus or gives latitude for pre-election sweeteners such as bringing forward personal income tax cuts as it prepares the midyear economic fiscal outlook, which is due in December.

In the latest edition of its budget monitor, Deloitte estimates company tax will raise almost $100bn this year, up $8.4bn on the 2018 budget forecast. The superannuation tax take is also up $1bn on forecasts.

...As a result, Deloitte estimates the underlying cash deficit will be $4.9bn in 2018-19, the smallest deficit since the global financial crisis, followed by a small surplus of $4.2bn in 2019-20.

Asked straight out when the election will be, Scott Morrison says “I’ll let you do the maths.”

“ ... It is absolutely our intention to deliver the budget before the election, and to deliver a surplus budget.”

The midyear economic and fiscal outlook will be delivered on 17 December. Right in the middle of Labor’s federal conference.

So we are looking at a 11 or 18 May election date.

So a federal budget on 2 April, clears the way for a May election.

Here we are – Katharine Murphy to the rescue

Scott Morrison has begun his press conference by talking about what he says is his government’s successes.

He mentions infrastructure, support for small- and medium-sized businesses, cutting red tape, support for veterans and working with “our Pacific family”.

We still don’t know what the press conference is about.

Scott Morrison has announced he will be holding a press conference with Josh Frydenberg at 11.45am.

It’s in the prime minister’s courtyard, which is, as we know, the fanciest of press conference locations.

The Greens party room discussed progress on a national integrity commission after the government supported a crossbench motion in the lower house yesterday.

The Greens plan to introduce a Senate bill on Wednesday is similar to MP Cathy McGowan’s bill but will address a few concerns of the government with minor tweaks:

• Retrospectivity will be addressed by limiting the anti-corruption body’s scope to alleged corruption in the last 10 years
• The definition of corruption could be changed to clarify that mere breach of a code of conduct would not attract a corruption finding

The Greens discussed the religious freedom issue after Labor indicated it will push ahead with a private members bill to repeal discrimination law exceptions in a bid to protect LGBT students. The Greens will seek to amend the bill to include protections of teachers, but will pass the bill if amendments are rejected because, basically, something is better than nothing.

The federal party room also discussed the results in the Victorian state election. The party is doing some soul-searching about vetting of candidates, but didn’t come to concrete conclusions about how to change processes.

The Greens results weren’t that bad in the view of the federal party, with the vote holding up in inner-city areas and losses triggered more by Liberals switching to Labor than a Greens collapse. The upper house preference-swapping system was blamed for the poor result there.

As I’m sure you’ve seen, our political editor, Katharine Murphy, last night revealed the government had been working on a national integrity commission until the leadership change earlier this year.

Murphy’s piece mentioned a new census of federal public servants, which, among other things, measured their experiences of corruption.

It’s a timely bit of data, so I just wanted to take you through it in a bit more detail. The chief finding was that 4,395 of respondents, or roughly 4.6%, said they had witnessed behaviour that could constitute corruption.

It’s an ever-so slight increase on the year prior, when 4.5% reported witnessing such behaviour. The most common forms of corruption witnessed were cronyism and nepotism.

The Australian Public Service Commission, which released the data, said “care needs to be taken” in its interpretation.

The APSC made clear the data only measures employee perceptions, rather than actual instances of corruption.

The census also shows most public servants believe their agencies were well-placed to deal with corruption.

About three-quarters said their agency had “procedures in place to manage corruption”.

Two-thirds said it would be hard to get away with corrupt behaviour in their agency.

It’s a vast bit of work.

The census ran from 7 May to 8 June 2018, and received responses from 103,137 federal public servants, a response rate of about 74%.

A separate survey of public service agencies found investigations of corruption were at their lowest level since 2012.

Seventy-eight employees were investigated for “behaviour that could be categorised as corrupt” in 2017-18, well down from the 121 investigations a year earlier.

Seventy-two of the 78 employees were found to have breached the Australian public service code of conduct.

This is one of the issues Kerryn Phelps mentioned in her maiden speech.

Late last week, there were 12 children still on Nauru with their families.

But while those children are being removed for medical treatment in Australia, there is still no plan on what to do with the single men.

A lot of you have been asking about election timing, lately.

Which isn’t really a surprise, given that, well, the government has until May to call it.

I can tell you that after talking to several people in Queensland, the LNP have been told to have their house in order by February.

That’s not necessarily because the Australia Day election call is a definite – it is certainly not the plan, as I understand it, but just in case.

So at this stage, yes, it still looks like May is the more likely election date, but if it all goes tits up between now and January, then the party is being told to have everything ready in case there is the need to go early.

I am assured by all quarters that we are only looking at a four-to-five-week campaign. Not just because everyone is broke, but because the longer an election campaign drags on, the worst the result tends to be for the government.

There are still some preselections in NSW to finish up as well (we are all still waiting for what happens with Craig Kelly) and there are some bits and pieces to be tidied up by the end of the year.

Labor, for what it is worth, has been on campaign footing since early this year, with it’s Parramatta campaign headquarters all but set up.

Independent senator Tim Storer is picking up the crossbench push from the Senate side to increase the Newstart allowance.

Acknowledging the work of Cathy McGowan, Storer says the social security commission bill would establish a body which would provide the parliament with independent advice on what social security payment levels should be at.

The commission’s job would be to determine:

• An acceptable standard of living for social security recipients
  
• Whether the current payment is adequate
  
• Recommended increases
  

Storer says it’s time:

“If Australia is to live up to its reputation for equity and fairness, social security payments need to be adjusted to a level which, in the case of Newstart and related payments, actually ensures the employability of recipients,” Storer will say in his speech later this afternoon.

“Letting it fall further and further behind national living standards for so long has just not worked. Successive governments of both political persuasions have failed to address this issue.

“For this reason, and more, the major issue of the level of social security payments should have an independent expert body which can provide independent advice to parliament on what is fair and adequate.”

Paul Karp has sent me the text of the Pauline Hanson motion mentioned below:

To move—That the Senate—

(a) acknowledges that:

(i) the Sentinelese people of the remote North Sentinel Islands are likely the last pre-Neolithic tribe in the world, and possess a unique culture and way of life that should be cherished and protected, and

(ii) even small levels of migration would have a devastating and irreversible effect on the beautiful and unique culture and way of life of the Sentinelese people;

and (b) supports the desire of the Sentinelese people to protect their culture and way of life through the enforcement of their strict zero-gross immigration policy.

I’m going to go ahead and guess that this won’t get the numbers to be brought on.

Ladies and gentlemen, your Senate:

The party room meetings are going on, which is why this place is deader than Steve Buscemi’s eyes.

Doug Cameron subjected himself to Q&A last night.

During a debate about socialism, Tom Switzer quipped to Cameron that there were still Labor MPs who identified as socialists in the UK, adding “[you] should go back to Scotland, mate”.

Which, as host Tony Jones pointed out, is “go back to where you come from” in different languages. Switzer says he was joking.

But the Scottish-born Cameron (who also has Lithuanian heritage, and I am always happy to find another Balt) said that “joke” is something he has had to get used to, but he worries for others who face it, and are not as secure in standing up for themselves:

It’s always easy to say it’s a joke. I’ve been told I’ve been incomprehensible by members of the Coalition, I’ve been told to go back to Scotland. And I can stand up for myself. I can. But you’ll get lots of migrants come here that don’t have that capacity and I think they get treated terribly.”

Stuart Robert tells Sky he wasn’t in the room when the Victorian MPs met with the prime minister, (which is obvious really, given he is not a Victorian MP) “so I’ll let those in the room speak for themselves” when asked about Kelly O’Dwyer’s reported comments.

He then proceeds to speak for himself.

“I think though there is some reaction to what happened on the weekend. It was probably a disappointing result, down in Victoria, the Victorians will now work through that in terms of their party processes. It is probably best to let them work through that in their own time.”

But he tells Laura Jayes he has not seen any elements of the party which are “homophobic, seen as anti-women, climate deniers”.

“Not that I’ve seen at all in any way shape or form,” he says.

“I think those who know the Liberal party and especially the national party will attest to that quite strongly. We’ve got a very firm energy target, we have a very firm commitment in terms of our climate change reduction...the prime minister has made it clear we will meet our Paris commitments at a canter by 2030.

“I think our climate change credentials are strong.”

In that same interview, Mark Dreyfus was asked about Scott Morrison’s pledge to Bill Shorten in question time yesterday, that the next federal election was a contest “between you and me”.

Dreyfus said “bring it on”

We are a united team. We’ve had Bill Shorten excellently leading our party for five years, with Tanya Plibersek as his deputy leader, and a very, very strong front bench team.

We’ve spent our time in Opposition developing policies. We are ready to govern, and I think that the people of Australia can see that we are ready to govern, led by Bill Shorten.

I’m very much hoping that, over the next six months, we roundoff the set of policies, the very full set of policies, that we have been working on that we can show the Australian people. And what are we offered by contrast?

A divided rabble from this Government, who can’t even answer the simple question of why Malcolm Turnbull is not now the prime minister of Australia.

Scott Morrison goes from bad to worse every day, ranting and shouting in the Parliament, ranting and shouting at press conferences, and I think the Australian people will see the very, very clear choice that we are presenting to them at the next election.”

Mark Dreyfus has spoken about Labor’s private members’ bill to ensure LGBTI kids in religious schools are not discriminated against.

Having a chat to ABC this morning (he was also on Sky) Dreyfus said Scott Morrison had promised to do this before the Wentworth byelection and there were just two sitting weeks left (seven days, but who is counting):

Absolutely, they’re dragging their heels. The Prime Minister promised to do this in the week before the Wentworth by-election.

He said there was no room in a modern Australia for this exemption in relation to students at religious schools.

He said that this would be legislated, to remove the exemption, in the next sitting fortnight.

That didn’t happen. And we need to move it forward. We haven’t heard again from the Government with a further draft.

They did put up two drafts to us in the sitting fortnight that the House of Representatives had when we were last here.

And it’s now time. So, of course, the Government should bring forward its own bill. But if they won’t, we’re going to give notice today of a private member’s bill that implements a Senate committee report that was tabled yesterday.

Disappointingly, not only does Mr Morrison seem to be walking away from the promise that he made - saying one thing and doing another - but Liberal senators dissented from that Senate committee report, which made a very clear recommendation that we remove this exemption for students.

We need to get on with it. I think that the people of Australia expect the Prime Minister to keep his promise.

Mark Butler has taken up Julie Bishop’s intervention, asking for the government to negotiate with Labor on the Neg and run with it:

Bill Shorten, Chris Bowen and I made an offer to the Government to return to the table and finish the work from three months ago to deliver the National Energy Guarantee. Scott Morrison had said all through the course of this year that that policy had a broader base of consensus than any other proposition he had seen in his 10 years of Parliament, and he and Josh Frydenberg reminded households that delivering the National Energy Guarantee would deliver a cut of $550.

We made that offer last week in good faith.

And within 24 or 36 hours, every business organisation in the country had urged the Government to return to the table, for the reason that everyone knows, which is this is the best way to bring Scott Morrison’s energy crisis to an end.

Over the past 48 hours, since the Victorian state election, we’ve seen a bevy of Coalition MPs, particularly Liberal Party MPs, say that this Government needs to take a more reasonable position on climate change, a more progressive position on climate change.

Meanwhile, Bob Katter, who is now a very important vote for the government, is sort of on board, sort of not, with the national integrity commission, because: Queensland.

He said in a statement:

I was one of the two Ministers in Queensland who made the decision to bring on the Fitzgerald inquiry, which changed the politics of Queensland.

There were 54 murders or murder-suicides that had taken place in Queensland, and it turned out that they were attributable to one small group of policemen who became known as ‘the joke’.

If we’d had the Criminal Justice Commission, as we call it in Queensland, seven or more years before, would we have stopped all of those murders?

When the Criminal Justice Commission came into existence, it became a sort of ‘Star Chamber’/‘Spanish Inquisition’. Dozens, maybe a hundred, totally innocent people were hung, drawn and quartered without any real chance of defending themselves. In many of the cases, they were the courageous heroes that had been fighting corruption.

One example was the then Premier of Queensland (Joh Bjelke-Petersen) – he was a man of honesty and decency, but there was a person in there that just hated him – and then the newspaper headlines become ‘Minister under attack; referred to the Criminal Justice Commission’, from then on your name is besmirched.

The National Integrity Commission Bill is a two-edged sword and I, of all people, found myself agonising over the vote, because I know how many innocents were sacrificed on the altar of public opinion in Queensland.

Christian Porter confirmed Katharine Murphy’s story from last night – that the government had been looking at how to set up something like a national integrity commission, before the leadership change.

But he also told ABC radio this morning that it’s not too high up on the agenda at the moment.

Well, I would say that this is not the absolute first and foremost priority legislative issue before the parliament and the government at the moment.

At the moment in parliament, we have legislation which is known as counter-encryption legislation which is designed to allow encrypted access for telecommunications between terrorists.

I would frankly say to listeners who witnessed recent events, that that is significant legislation. When Labor announced the commitment in principle to such a change, they noted that corruption has not become a major problem in Australian political life.

We would tend to agree. But, equally, I think that there are reasons why you can argue that there should be substantive changes to present arrangements because they are capable of serious improvement.