One Nation ‘not our enemy but an opponent’, Liberal senator says
Nino Bucci
James Paterson, the shadow defence minister, says that One Nation’s “increased prominence” should bring “increased scrutiny”, brushing off suggestions from new party president Tony Abbott that the Liberals should not fight with parties to their political right.
Paterson told the ABC on Monday night:
One Nation are not our enemy but they are a political opponent, they are trying to take votes and seats off the Liberal party.
Their increased prominence in the polls brings increased legitimate scrutiny on their performance, on their policies, on their candidates, on their conduct.
Paterson went on to quote a story from The Australian that reported One Nation’s leader, Pauline Hanson, missed 88% of Senate estimates hearings in the past decade.
When asked directly by comments from Abbott that suggested the Liberals should not fight with One Nation, Paterson responded:
It’s up to the parliamentary party to chart our own course, and I’m very clear about our role in this.
It’s not really his role as party president, it’s an organisational role, his role is to rally the troops, to raise money, to get the campaign organisations fighting fit, I’m very pleased he’s put his hand up for that role, he’ll be outstanding in it.
Key events
Australian population surpasses 28 million
Australia’s population has just ticked over 28 million, according to the Australian bureau of statistics. We surpassed the milestone just before 6am this morning, and right now that count has just hit 28,000,159.
What’s that based on?
The ABS calculates based on the estimated population at 1 July 2025 and then adds on the following.
-
One birth every 2 minutes and 16 seconds.
-
One death every 3 minutes and 33 seconds.
-
One person arriving to live in Australia every 59 seconds.
-
One Australian resident leaving to live overseas every 2 minutes and 35 seconds.
It adds up to a total population increase of one person every 1 minutes and 15 seconds.
You can see the population clock from the bureau here.
Benita Kolovos
Victorian government introduces tougher IVF regulation
The Victorian health minister, Harriet Shing, says the IVF industry will face greater scrutiny under new laws being introduced to parliament today.
Speaking to reporters outside parliament, Shing says the legislation today to overhaul assisted reproductive technology (ART) safeguards, including greater powers to cancel an IVF clinics registration or for their premises to be inspected and documents seized.
It follows a national review into the sector last year after the Monash IVF embryo mix up scandal.
This is something which states worked with Victoria as we initiated the review to ensure we could get that collaborative effort. We know that across Australia … people who are wanting to welcome a baby into their lives, deserve onerous and rigorous standards to be applied to IVF providers. We also know that there are a number of private providers that work across different jurisdictions, so it’s really important that there is legislation that is consistent around Australia to enable people to get the confidence they need.
Benita Kolovos
Liberal party considering legal position over proposed donation laws
The Victorian shadow attorney general, Liberal MP James Newbury, says his party is considering its legal position over the government’s proposed donation laws.
As we reported late last week, the Labor government will introduce legislation to parliament this week to cap donations at $10,000 and increase administrative funding for exisiting MPs after the high court struck down the state’s donation laws in April.
The government – which must rely on either the cross-bench or the Coalition to pass legislation – conceded it would have to do away with so-called “nominated entities”, which effectively allowed the major parties access to legacy funds.
The nominated entity clause prompted the high court challenge.
Newbury told reporters without nominated entities the “established money in the political system is banned, except from the unions to the Labor party, the proposed laws are rigged”.
Newbury said:
Last night, at 11pm the government provided a final draft of the bill that’s being introduced. We have very, very deep concerns about what the government is proposing, our concerns are that the proposed laws have more constitutional flaws than the previous laws. We are considering our legal position.
He added that he was also concerned the increased administrative funding would be challenged by the high court:
If you take into account the increase in public funding versus where the donation caps are, there in my view are serious concerns about protecting incumbency, and when you read the high court’s judgment they spoke quite specifically not only to nominated entities but barriers to entry effectively, and when you increase public funding strongly for incumbents, but keep caps on donations low, you are actually entrenching that advantage. So both points, I think, are worth raising with the premier, both that, but also the fact that the only big money they’re allowing is union money.
Chalmers defends government’s housing record following secret RBA note
Jim Chalmers has defended the government’s housing targets, following reporting in Nine Newspapers of an internal memo from the Reserve Bank labelling Labor’s first three years of housing policy “relatively modest”.
The documents obtained by Nine Newspapers were prepared for members ahead of an RBA board meeting in May last year.
The treasurer, who spoke to reporters in the press gallery corridor between interviews this morning, said substantial steps had been taken since the note was written.
In our first term, we’re playing catch up on housing, because our predecessors had neglected housing for the best part of a decade. So, we’ve got this primary focus on supply. You can’t build 1.2 million homes overnight, it takes time …
So I’ve seen those stories, but we have taken very substantial additional steps since then.
Hanson’s attendance ‘up to Pauline’, says Farley
One Nation representative, David Farley, says it’s up to Pauline Hanson on when and how she attends parliament, skirting questions about her track record on RN Breakfast earlier this morning
Farley, who won the Farrer byelection in May, will be sworn into Parliament this morning.
Asked whether he commit to attending all sessions of Parliament, Farley says “that’s my objective, unless something calls me with a greater urgency outside of it”.
I’m not exactly sure if, you know, besides reading the press on the weekend, Pauline’s attendance record and understanding it. But it’s up to Pauline to see where she’s more effective. And I’ll leave that to that question for Pauline.
Just last week Hanson posted a photograph on social media (while estimates was on) of herself and mining magnate Clive Palmer enjoying a lunch in Queensland for her birthday.
Hanson ‘can’t even be bothered showing up to do her job’: Paterson
The shadow defence minister, James Paterson, has taken a jab at Pauline Hanson’s attendance in parliament, and says it reflects badly on her.
Reporting in The Australian yesterday found Hanson had skipped 88% of Senate estimates hearings. There’s “no more important forum” than estimates for an opposition or crossbencher, Paterson says.
Asked whether people at home flocking towards One Nation would care about her attendance, Paterson said, “they may or they may not, but I still think it’s important because senators are paid very well by taxpayers to do our job”:
If 88% of the time Senator Hanson can’t even be bothered showing up to do her job, to advocate for her constituents, I think that reflects badly on her commitment to her job.
Paterson agrees with Chalmers that the biggest driver of One Nation’s popularity is the economy. But he also says the public are “animated” by cultural issues.
I think the biggest driver is the economy. I think it’s the loss of living standards that Australians have suffered in the post-pandemic era, which has meant they’re very disillusioned with the direction of their country and they are looking for alternatives. But they are also animated by cultural issues. They are animated by the flag, anthem and Anzac Day. They’re also very concerned about immigration.
I think it’s in Australia’s interest that mainstream politics resolves those problems, solves them in a way that minor parties have no interest in actually solving them. They just want to mine them for political grievance.
That last line sounds pretty similar to what Chalmers was just saying about the Coalition and One Nation.
‘Real risk of capability gap emerging’: Paterson
The shadow defence minister, James Paterson, is next in the RN Breakfast hot seat, and voices concern over yesterday’s announcement that Australia will receive three used Virginia-class submarines from the United States under the Aukus agreement.
Paterson says that the boats have a lifespan of around 33 years and we would be receiving them when they are already a decade old, which could open up some capability gaps in the future.
It means they need to be replaced sooner by other submarines. And that’s the SSN Aukus program, which is the Australian program to build nuclear submarines with the United Kingdom. If that doesn’t happen on plan and on schedule, and these are megaprojects that have high risks, then you have a real risk of a capability gap emerging.
Paterson says that in the government’s “optimal pathway” plan, Australia was to receive one new Virginia class submarine, and two secondhand ones.
Host Sally Sara asks if it’s worth taking the three secondhand subs to maintain a good relationship with the US, but Paterson says, “not in my view, no”.
I think the most important thing about this program is securing Australia’s national interest, about being able to defend our values, about how to defend our country ultimately and we shouldn’t swap that for praise from a foreign government. We should do what we believe is in our national interest.
Treasurer says shift towards One Nation economic in nature
Chalmers says the voter shift towards One Nation is being driven by the economy, which he says the government doesn’t dismiss.
But he adds that Labor wants to address it, whereas the opposition and One Nation want to use it for political point scoring.
One Nation’s primary vote has been quickly catching up to Labor and one poll in the Financial Review on Sunday showed the minor party had overtaken the government.
Chalmers says:
People do have legitimate concerns about how the war in the Middle East is playing out and the hefty price that we are paying for it in inflation here at home. And so we don’t dismiss for one second or disregard for one moment the very legitimate concern that people have about where they fit in our economy and in our society.
The difference between us and the three-ring circus on the right of politics is that they want to benefit politically from this sense of dislocation, whereas we want to address it.
Chalmers prepared to take the ‘political hit’ for CGT changes
Jim Chalmers has said from the beginning that he understands his budget is contentious, but new polling from Redbridge shows that the measures haven’t been a hit with the young people it’s supposed to help either.
Polling shows that 51% of millennial voters believe the budget would be bad for them personally.
Chalmers tells RN Breakfast again that he didn’t expect to be popular, particularly in a difficult economic time. The government’s also left itself plenty of room before the next election when the polls actually count.
Chalmers says:
I would rather get the policy right and take a political hit for that than to take a much easier decision politically, which is to leave everything exactly as it is.
‘Our job here is not to target a particular price outcome’: Chalmers
Jim Chalmers says auction clearance rates were already slowing before the budget, as prices across capital cities face a fall of up to 10%.
Speaking to RN Breakfast, Chalmers reiterates that the Treasury department predicts house prices will continue to increase, but more slowly, and says first home buyers should be getting a fair chance at auctions.
Host, Sally Sara asks if it’s a good thing if prices go backwards. Chalmers says:
Our job here is not to target a particular price outcome. Our job here is to make sure that there are more affordable options for first home buyers to get a toehold in what has been historically a really difficult market …
The tax changes aren’t the only factor here. The last few decisions from the independent Reserve Bank are playing a role, the softer economic conditions are playing a role as well.
Asked whether he’s concerned that first home buyers using the 5% deposit scheme could end up with negative equity in their first few years of ownership, Chalmers says “no”, because housing is a medium term, or long term investment, not a short term one.
