This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2016/may/05/tony-abbott-suggests-the-mining-industry-should-demonstrate-their-gratitude-to-ian-macfarlane-politics-live

The article has changed 23 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 5 Version 6
Tony Abbott suggests the mining industry should demonstrate their gratitude to Ian Macfarlane – politics live Tony Abbott suggests the mining industry should demonstrate their gratitude to Ian Macfarlane – politics live
(35 minutes later)
3.04am BST
03:04
If you’d like to view that exchange.
.@EwenJonesMP crashes @CliveFPalmer's press conference. Full argument ensues. #auspol @SBSNewshttps://t.co/JiKhIt6mPm
3.02am BST
03:02
2.54am BST
02:54
The Clive Palmer circus has touched down in another parliamentary courtyard. There are evidently more Senate candidates to announce. But the member for Herbert Ewen Jones has joined the spectacle today and decides to engage in a little sledging from the sidelines. Queensland Nickel is in his electorate.
Ewen Jones:
When are you giving back the money that’s gone to Palmer United from Queensland Nickel? What about the purchases you have made?
Clive Palmer:
None of that is true.
Ewen Jones:
It is true.
Clive Palmer:
Of course it’s not true. You are just desperate to lose your seat.
Ewen Jones:
If I lose my seat ..
Clive Palmer:
You know they spoke to you in October - I spoke to you in October and you told me to get stuffed, the government wouldn’t put any money in. That was in 2015.
Ewen Jones:
This is your company, Clive.
Clive Palmer:
The Australian government is a disgrace. There’s 14,000 workers in Whyalla, why don’t you go down there and get the government to stop those people losing their jobs.
Ewen Jones:
I am looking after Townsville.
Clive Palmer:
You are looking after yourself, nobody else. You don’t look after anybody else and you will soon be unemployed.
Ewen Jones:
And unemployable. I am happy to be unemployed. I am happy to be unemployed if it means you ...
One of the new Palmer candidates, to Jones:
Goodbye, Ewen.
Would you like a tissue?
2.44am BST
02:44
Paul Karp
Still in other chambers, finance officials have revealed that taking university fee deregulation out of the budget has saved $1.5bn, because the government will be lending less in HELP debt as a result.
Deferring removal of the student loan fees by a year will save about $0.5bn.
Labor’s Penny Wong asked for a breakdown for savings, but the finance minister Mathias Cormann directed further questions to the education portfolio. “Why don’t you just say ‘because we’re cutting funding from universities?” Wong asked.
(A direct answer to a direct question? Dream on - this is a committee.)
2.34am BST
02:34
Ben Doherty
In other chambers, the president of the the Australian human rights commission, Professor Gillian Triggs, has told Senate estimates this morning asylum seekers and refugees on Manus Island and Nauru should be moved to a “safer place”.
“Our position at the AHRC is that because of the prolonged detention on these two islands, the failure to provide a durable solution or settlement, coupled with the particularly poor and dangerous conditions, means that they must be moved to a safer place for settlement,” Triggs told an estimates hearing this morning.
Her comments follow a call from the United Nations high commissioner for refugees for those held in Australia’s offshore detention regime to be moved to “humane conditions”. Two refugees on Nauru have self-immolated in the past eight days. And last week, PNG’s Supreme Court ruled that the detention on Manus Island is illegal and must be ended.
Asked if a safer place for settlement meant moving people to Australia, Triggs said matters of policy were for the government to decide, but that Australia “seems to be a logical step particularly in light of the Supreme Court decision”.
Among broader concerns for the physical safety and mental health of those in offshore detention, Triggs said she was particularly concerned for homosexual people on Manus and Nauru, where homosexuality is illegal.
“A particular couple on Nauru, we are told, are fearful of leaving their living quarters because they are fearful of being attacked. For people of a different sexual orientation, it is a difficult, distressing and potentially dangerous situation.”
Australia sending homosexual people to a place where they could face violence, discrimination, criminal charges, or persecution for their sexuality could be regarded as ‘refoulement’, a breach of Australia’s international legal obligations, Triggs said.
2.25am BST2.25am BST
02:2502:25
Given I was highly truncated in my coverage of the Turnbull interview to ensure we got across the full range of issues – I skipped through to the nub which was the medium term outlook – it is actually worth posting the full section on company tax costings, just so you get the full journey, which was, as noted, somewhat inelegant. Given I was highly truncated in my coverage of the Turnbull interview to ensure we got across the full range of issues – I skipped through to the nub which was the medium-term outlook – it is actually worth posting the full section on company tax costings, just so you get the full journey, which was, as noted, somewhat inelegant.
SPEERS: So, the company tax plan what is going to cost of ten years? SPEERS: So, the company tax plan: what is it going to cost over 10 years?
TURNBULL: Well we have not - the Treasury has not identified the dollar cost of that particular item. TURNBULL: Well we have not – the Treasury has not identified the dollar cost of that particular item.
SPEERS: What not?SPEERS: What not?
TURNBULL: Let me just go on. What is has does is set out a medium term outlook in which, which takes account of the company tax cut and of course all the other tax arrangements. So, it takes a number of assumptions including the ten year cuts to company tax which at the end of that period sees all companies paying 25% tax and as you can see from the budget papers is shows the budget returning to balance which is where is should be. Which is where we seek to bring it. TURNBULL: Let me just go on. What is has does is set out a medium-term outlook in which, which takes account of the company tax cut and of course all the other tax arrangements. So, it takes a number of assumptions including the 10-year cuts to company tax which at the end of that period sees all companies paying 25% tax and as you can see from the budget papers is shows the budget returning to balance which is where is should be. Which is where we seek to bring it.
SPEERS: What price? This cut to company tax. I mean surely you’ve modelled this, there’s need some consideration on what it costs?SPEERS: What price? This cut to company tax. I mean surely you’ve modelled this, there’s need some consideration on what it costs?
TURNBULL: The Treasury has modelled that.TURNBULL: The Treasury has modelled that.
SPEERS: So, what’s the cost?SPEERS: So, what’s the cost?
TURNBULL: Well the Treasury has modelled that and set out in the budget, showing in the medium term outcome. TURNBULL: Well the Treasury has modelled that and set out in the budget, showing in the medium-term outcome.
SPEERS: I’m asking about the ten year - you put a ten year plan in the budget, what’s the cost? SPEERS: I’m asking about the 10-year – you put a 10-year plan in the budget, what’s the cost?
TURNBULL: All of those costs are taken into account in the medium term outlook and it’s set out. TURNBULL: All of those costs are taken into account in the medium-term outlook and it’s set out.
SPEERS: What is the cost?SPEERS: What is the cost?
TURNBULL: Well, it’s set out there. You can see the outcome.TURNBULL: Well, it’s set out there. You can see the outcome.
SPEERS: I can’t see it in the budget?SPEERS: I can’t see it in the budget?
TURNBULL: You can.TURNBULL: You can.
SPEERS: What the ten year figure is. SPEERS: What the 10-year figure is.
TURNBULL: You can see it there. The budget outcome, the balance over to 26/27 is set out there on page 3-11 on Budget Paper 1. TURNBULL: You can see it there. The budget outcome, the balance over to 26-27 is set out there on page 3-11 on budget paper 1.
SPEERS: And what’s the figure?SPEERS: And what’s the figure?
TURNBULL: Well you can see it there. It shows the budget returning to balance.TURNBULL: Well you can see it there. It shows the budget returning to balance.
SPEERS: Doesn’t say what the cost is though, not the budget returning to balance. What’s the cost of your company tax plan?SPEERS: Doesn’t say what the cost is though, not the budget returning to balance. What’s the cost of your company tax plan?
TURNBULL: The cost of the plan is set out in the medium term outlook and shows the Budget returning to balance. TURNBULL: The cost of the plan is set out in the medium-term outlook and shows the budget returning to balance.
SPEERS: So what is it? I don’t understand what the cost is? What’s it going to cost taxpayers to cut the company tax rate to 25%?SPEERS: So what is it? I don’t understand what the cost is? What’s it going to cost taxpayers to cut the company tax rate to 25%?
TURNBULL: Well what it ensures is that we’ll have stronger jobs and growth. David, you’re asking for a ... TURNBULL: Well, what it ensures is that we’ll have stronger jobs and growth. David, you’re asking for a ...
SPEERS: Dollar figure.SPEERS: Dollar figure.
TURNBULL: No, look lets be quite clear. What the Treasury does and every budget does this, is set out very detailed itemised assumptions over four years. Ok, that’s why they’re called the forward estimates. And then they make their assumptions going out for ten years and they set out what they call the medium term outlook and that medium term outlook takes into account assumptions which include the ten year enterprise tax plan which will drive jobs and growth over those ten years. And is clearly affordable, lives within our means. TURNBULL: No, look lets be quite clear. What the Treasury does and every budget does this, is set out very detailed itemised assumptions over four years. Ok, that’s why they’re called the forward estimates. And then they make their assumptions going out for 10 years and they set out what they call the mediu- term outlook and that medium-term outlook takes into account assumptions which include the 10-year enterprise tax plan which will drive jobs and growth over those 10 years. And is clearly affordable, lives within our means.
SPEERS: Well how do we know it’s affordable? How is it clearly affordable, what does it afford, what does it cost? It’s pretty simple question prime minister. SPEERS: Well how do we know it’s affordable? How is it clearly affordable, what does it afford, what does it cost? It’s pretty simple question, prime minister.
TURNBULL: David, what you’re asking is… TURNBULL: David, what you’re asking is …
SPEERS: The cost… SPEERS: The cost …
TURNBULL: ... for me to unpick every single line item of those assumptions going out to 26/27 and the budget papers do not do that - TURNBULL: ... for me to unpick every single line item of those assumptions going out to 26-27 and the budget papers do not do that –
SPEERS: I’m not, I’m just asking what the overall cost is. This is not a difficult question.TURNBULL: David. David, I’m not going to add to the detail that is in the budget papers, and the budget papers set out. SPEERS: I’m not, I’m just asking what the overall cost is. This is not a difficult question.
SPEERS: Then why put a ten year plan in the budget papers? Why not just put the four year plan in the budget papers?TURNBULL: Because what we, well, the budget papers set out a medium term outlook and they do that every Budget. And they make assumptions about tax rates, they make assumptions about GDP, they make assumptions about commodity prices. And of course, the further out they go, you know, the, the, there is a - the longer, further out you forecast, there is more uncertainty. One of the certain assumptions that is in the medium term outlook is of course the policy which will be legislated to reduce company tax, down to 25 per cent over ten years.SPEERS: The economist Chris Richardson reckons it’s about $55bn .. TURNBULL: Well look, he may well may be right. He may well be right. He may well be right in the dollars of 26/27. I mean, again, this is, you see . People can -SPEERS: Let’s talk about today’s dollars before people get too confused on, in factoring in inflation. But $55bn is about right?TURNBULL: No, I’m not. I don’t, look. What I’m saying to you is, we know what it will cost over the forward estimates, which is in excess of $5bn as Scott Morrison has said. And economists like Chris Richardson can make assumptions and they can, you know, work them out and they can forecast them just as the Treasury has done, but what the Treasury does, and this is, I’ve got to be very clear about this, they do this every year. We’re not doing anything differently. They provide very detailed, itemised assumptions over four years and then they say ‘our best forecast of what the Budget is going to look like over the decade, over the medium-term outlook is as follows, and you can see there it sets out -SPEERS: But you’re the one who has made this ten year commitment and you’ve put it in the budget -TURNBULL: Can I just say to you, I’m not confirming or commenting on Chris Richardson other than to say, he’s a former Treasury economist and no doubt you should heed what his advice is. It may or may not be correct. TURNBULL: David. David, I’m not going to add to the detail that is in the budget papers, and the budget papers set out.
SPEERS: Then why put a 10-year plan in the budget papers? Why not just put the four-year plan in the budget papers?
TURNBULL: Because what we, well, the budget papers set out a medium-term outlook and they do that every budget. And they make assumptions about tax rates, they make assumptions about GDP, they make assumptions about commodity prices. And of course, the further out they go, you know, the, the, there is a – the longer, further out you forecast, there is more uncertainty. One of the certain assumptions that is in the medium-term outlook is of course the policy which will be legislated to reduce company tax, down to 25% over 10 years.
SPEERS: The economist Chris Richardson reckons it’s about $55bn …
TURNBULL: Well look, he may well may be right. He may well be right. He may well be right in the dollars of 26-27. I mean, again, this is, you see. People can –
SPEERS: Let’s talk about today’s dollars before people get too confused on, in factoring in inflation. But $55bn is about right?
TURNBULL: No, I’m not. I don’t, look. What I’m saying to you is, we know what it will cost over the forward estimates, which is in excess of $5bn as Scott Morrison has said. And economists like Chris Richardson can make assumptions and they can, you know, work them out and they can forecast them just as the Treasury has done, but what the Treasury does, and this is, I’ve got to be very clear about this, they do this every year. We’re not doing anything differently. They provide very detailed, itemised assumptions over four years and then they say, ‘Our best forecast of what the budget is going to look like over the decade, over the medium-term outlook is as follows, and you can see there it sets out –
SPEERS: But you’re the one who has made this 10-year commitment and you’ve put it in the budget –
TURNBULL: Can I just say to you, I’m not confirming or commenting on Chris Richardson other than to say, he’s a former Treasury economist and no doubt you should heed what his advice is. It may or may not be correct.
Updated
at 2.40am BST
2.17am BST2.17am BST
02:1702:17
Show us the money, prime ministerShow us the money, prime minister
Down in the House, Labor is going to town on this morning’s Sky interview with the prime minister, which was, as they say in the classics, untidy.Down in the House, Labor is going to town on this morning’s Sky interview with the prime minister, which was, as they say in the classics, untidy.
The shadow treasurer Chris Bowen has moved that the House notes that “in an extraordinary interview with David Speers on Sky News this morning”:The shadow treasurer Chris Bowen has moved that the House notes that “in an extraordinary interview with David Speers on Sky News this morning”:
The motion condemns the prime minister ..The motion condemns the prime minister ..
The government has gagged the motion. They are voting now.The government has gagged the motion. They are voting now.
2.04am BST2.04am BST
02:0402:04
All today needed was a bit of George W Bush and Paula and the bounty of the internet delivers.All today needed was a bit of George W Bush and Paula and the bounty of the internet delivers.
UpdatedUpdated
at 2.08am BSTat 2.08am BST
1.59am BST1.59am BST
01:5901:59
One of the many reasons to love the Canberra political blogger Paula Matthewson.One of the many reasons to love the Canberra political blogger Paula Matthewson.
Oops, found this as I was looking for a budget image https://t.co/D1b8sIY1fQ ping @murpharoo pic.twitter.com/tJqDW34vOwOops, found this as I was looking for a budget image https://t.co/D1b8sIY1fQ ping @murpharoo pic.twitter.com/tJqDW34vOw
UpdatedUpdated
at 2.08am BSTat 2.08am BST
1.50am BST1.50am BST
01:5001:50
Downstairs, the Labor leader Bill Shorten is giving the colleagues a pep talk ahead of tonight’s budget in reply speech. From the context of the remarks I suspect Shorten is at the Labor women’s caucus but I don’t know that for sure.Downstairs, the Labor leader Bill Shorten is giving the colleagues a pep talk ahead of tonight’s budget in reply speech. From the context of the remarks I suspect Shorten is at the Labor women’s caucus but I don’t know that for sure.
Bill Shorten:Bill Shorten:
Today is not an election launch ... but what I can promise this group is when it comes to the unequal treatment of women, we understand them.Today is not an election launch ... but what I can promise this group is when it comes to the unequal treatment of women, we understand them.
What the conservatives pigeon hole as ‘women’s issues’ are all our issues.What the conservatives pigeon hole as ‘women’s issues’ are all our issues.
1.45am BST1.45am BST
01:4501:45
Paul KarpPaul Karp
Finance department officials have confirmed, meanwhile, in Senate estimates that they didn’t begin drawing up timetable changes to move the budget a week forward to 3 May until the prime minister announced it on 21 March. Officials said they began to think about the move because of public speculation but didn’t change the timetable until the government had made a decision.Finance department officials have confirmed, meanwhile, in Senate estimates that they didn’t begin drawing up timetable changes to move the budget a week forward to 3 May until the prime minister announced it on 21 March. Officials said they began to think about the move because of public speculation but didn’t change the timetable until the government had made a decision.
Finance minister Mathias Cormann, at the table, also won’t answer the question about whether he knew the budget had been moved to 3 May before the prime minister announced it. (You might remember Scott Morrison was caught somewhat on the hop.)Finance minister Mathias Cormann, at the table, also won’t answer the question about whether he knew the budget had been moved to 3 May before the prime minister announced it. (You might remember Scott Morrison was caught somewhat on the hop.)
Mathias Cormann:Mathias Cormann:
I was aware the budget would be on 3 May on the day the announcement was made.I was aware the budget would be on 3 May on the day the announcement was made.
Senator Penny Wong asked repeatedly if Cormann knew before Turnbull announced it, and said it was a “little embarrassing” he would not confirm he knew before. Cormann repeated formulations he was aware “on the day” it was announced.Senator Penny Wong asked repeatedly if Cormann knew before Turnbull announced it, and said it was a “little embarrassing” he would not confirm he knew before. Cormann repeated formulations he was aware “on the day” it was announced.
UpdatedUpdated
at 2.09am BSTat 2.09am BST
1.39am BST1.39am BST
01:3901:39
Tony Abbott, in one, off-the-cuff speech (that was meant to be about reflecting on the manifest glory of the Abbott years), making a compelling case for a federal integrity body.Tony Abbott, in one, off-the-cuff speech (that was meant to be about reflecting on the manifest glory of the Abbott years), making a compelling case for a federal integrity body.
UpdatedUpdated
at 2.09am BSTat 2.09am BST
1.34am BST1.34am BST
01:3401:34
Abbott: it gets worseAbbott: it gets worse
Gabrielle ChanGabrielle Chan
While we are all still digesting Tony Abbott’s comments on Ian Macfarlane, there was a little nugget from his speech that we haven’t yet covered.While we are all still digesting Tony Abbott’s comments on Ian Macfarlane, there was a little nugget from his speech that we haven’t yet covered.
The former prime minister in the adjournment debate was also singing the praises of the integrity of the retiring Liberal senator Bill Heffernan as “the only member of this parliament I have ever met who never sought promotion”.The former prime minister in the adjournment debate was also singing the praises of the integrity of the retiring Liberal senator Bill Heffernan as “the only member of this parliament I have ever met who never sought promotion”.
Abbott then moved to a personal anecdote. He told the parliament that as a “relatively new member of parliament”, he was invited to drinks by a well-known millionaire.Abbott then moved to a personal anecdote. He told the parliament that as a “relatively new member of parliament”, he was invited to drinks by a well-known millionaire.
Tony Abbott:Tony Abbott:
As I was leaving he gave me an envelope and said, ‘That’s your Christmas present. When I opened it up it contained $5,000 in cash. I can tell you, the Abbott family in those days could have used that money, but it did not feel right. I rang Bill Heffernan for his advice and he said, ‘Once bought, always bought. Give it back and say to that person, “Please write out a cheque for the campaign.”’As I was leaving he gave me an envelope and said, ‘That’s your Christmas present. When I opened it up it contained $5,000 in cash. I can tell you, the Abbott family in those days could have used that money, but it did not feel right. I rang Bill Heffernan for his advice and he said, ‘Once bought, always bought. Give it back and say to that person, “Please write out a cheque for the campaign.”’
There are two things about this story.There are two things about this story.
The first is the spectre of politicians being offered envelopes full of cash. What for? We don’t know. But remember he is talking about an experience at the beginning of this career. Not at its height.The first is the spectre of politicians being offered envelopes full of cash. What for? We don’t know. But remember he is talking about an experience at the beginning of this career. Not at its height.
The other is that while the cash was rejected, the “softer path” is to make a donation as a party donation. That is, the knowledge of an potential expectation tied to a specific member can be attached to a particular apparently generic donation made out to a political party.The other is that while the cash was rejected, the “softer path” is to make a donation as a party donation. That is, the knowledge of an potential expectation tied to a specific member can be attached to a particular apparently generic donation made out to a political party.
If you want to feel just a bit sick, think about that.If you want to feel just a bit sick, think about that.
UpdatedUpdated
at 2.11am BSTat 2.11am BST
1.25am BST1.25am BST
01:2501:25
David Speers has moved on to housing. What about housing prices in Sydney? Turnbull says this is a supply side question. The answer to housing affordability is not Labor’s negative gearing policy. That will smash the housing market, Turnbull says.David Speers has moved on to housing. What about housing prices in Sydney? Turnbull says this is a supply side question. The answer to housing affordability is not Labor’s negative gearing policy. That will smash the housing market, Turnbull says.
Speers then moves to the super changes in the budget, and how they might encourage wealthy people to redirect money out of super and towards negatively geared housing investments. Turnbull says super remains a very attractive investment.Speers then moves to the super changes in the budget, and how they might encourage wealthy people to redirect money out of super and towards negatively geared housing investments. Turnbull says super remains a very attractive investment.
Q: You don’t think they’ll be taking huge amounts of money out of superannuation?Q: You don’t think they’ll be taking huge amounts of money out of superannuation?
Malcolm Turnbull:Malcolm Turnbull:
Super will remain a very attractive investment.Super will remain a very attractive investment.
Q: What are your plans for Sunday? Will you be visiting the governor general on Sunday?Q: What are your plans for Sunday? Will you be visiting the governor general on Sunday?
Turnbull says he’ll be visiting the governor general “shortly” and there will be an election on 2 July.Turnbull says he’ll be visiting the governor general “shortly” and there will be an election on 2 July.
UpdatedUpdated
at 2.13am BSTat 2.13am BST
1.20am BST
01:20
Speers presses Turnbull on tax growing as a share of the economy over the forward estimates while the deficit reduction is on the slow track. Turnbull says the tax share is growing because the economy is growing.
The Sky political editor then presses on the cost of the company tax cuts over the 10-year horizon. Where is the government’s costing?
Turnbull points him to page 311 of the budget papers, he says the cost is there. No, it isn’t, Speers says. (It isn’t, not in the explicit way Speers is asking for it). Turnbull then explains about the medium-term outlook in the budget process. Speers fully understands the medium-term outlook process in the budget. He doesn’t need that MalSplained™.
Speers just wants the 10-year costing, which as he says, isn’t that hard.
No banana, David.
Malcolm Turnbull:
I’m not going to add the detail that’s in the budget papers.
Updated
at 2.14am BST
1.13am BST
01:13
Malcolm Turnbull on Sky News
Sky political editor David Speers opens with the killing of Neil Prakash. Did Australia help point the US to Prakash, knowing this was a kill operation? Brandis said as much to Sky earlier today.
Turnbull says he won’t add to that, but says jihadists are enemies of Australia once they choose to wage war in theatres overseas.
The next question is on Papua New Guinea and the Manus detainees. What’s happening in the wake of the PNG supreme court decision? Turnbull says people offshore cannot come back to Australia.
Q: Does Australia have a responsibility here?
Malcolm Turnbull:
We are doing everything we can to ensure they are well cared for ... and encourage them to either return home or settle in PNG ... or a third party.
Q: Have you ever met Donald Trump?
Malcolm Turnbull:
I’ve never met Mr Trump, no.
Q: Is it time to build some bridges?
Malcolm Turnbull:
Well, we’ll see. Ultimately this is a decision for the American people.
Speers points to all the daily Trump nonsense on the TPP and China and the region.
Malcolm Turnbull:
It’s an election campaign in America and I’ll leave that adjudication to the American people.
Q: Surely you’d object to these things?
Malcolm Turnbull:
Surely I would not.
Updated
at 2.15am BST
1.02am BST
01:02
In addition to all the bits and pieces, we have the prime minister coming up on Sky News, and we also have two days of Senate estimates hearings. I’ll cover the prime minister, obviously, and will tune in to estimates as I can.
The Liberal senator Cory Bernardi, in a committee just now.
I for one am grateful that they are getting baton training.
(I have no context for this remark. Let’s move on.)
Updated
at 1.21am BST
12.52am BST
00:52
Scott Morrison has made a speech this morning to accountants about the budget and has been stopped by reporters afterwards. The treasurer is still selling the government’s budget, and given it’s Bill Shorten’s big night tonight, Morrison is attempting to establish the key test for the ALP.
This, of course, is about framing. The government tries to frame Labor’s key tests, Labor attempts to frame the government’s tests.
Scott Morrison:
Bill Shorten tonight needs to outline very clearly just how much more he’s going to spend. Because the more he spends, the more he will tax you. Every moment you see Bill Shorten’s lips moving tonight, he will be spending more, which means he will be taxing you more. And he needs to be crystal clear with the Australian people about just how much more he is going to spend. And that includes not proceeding with the savings that this government has been able to put in place. The savings that he has been blocking.
So tax and spend is the official frame. No shocks there.
But reporters are still chasing him over Labor’s framing question (well one of them) about Tuesday’s document.
Q: Will you be releasing the full costings of your 10-year corporate tax plan?
Scott Morrison:
It’s in the budget. If you look at the medium-term projections on the underlying cash balance, it goes out to 26-27 and our full tax plan is incorporated in those projections as provided for by Treasury.
So it’s fully accounted for. It’s there.
Updated
at 1.20am BST
12.41am BST
00:41
Good morning to Matt Davey. Politics Live would be lost without him. Thanks for this, we are checking it out.
@murpharoo Hello. Michaela Cash has told @774melbourne that the Intern Programme will be compulsory, not voluntary. pic.twitter.com/neKUW0JZ6i
12.09am BST
00:09
Are Abbott's remarks consistent with his own code of conduct?
Back to Abbott for a moment because I am still doing yoga breathing on the story I opened with this morning.
Tony Abbott’s remarks raise a lot of questions, as I noted first up, but one thing I didn’t note first up was whether or not they are even consistent with his own ministerial code of conduct while he was the prime minister.
The Abbott ministerial code (which as far as I know has been picked up by Malcolm Turnbull) says the following about jobs after politics.
Ministers are required to undertake that, for an 18-month period after ceasing to be a minister, they will not lobby, advocate or have business meetings with members of the government, parliament, public service or defence force on any matters on which they have had official dealings as minister in their last 18 months in office.
Ministers are also required to undertake that, on leaving office, they will not take personal advantage of information to which they have had access as a minister, where that information is not generally available to the public.
There is another part of the code that’s potentially relevant given the unplugged way Abbott expressed his view in the adjournment debate.
Ministers are expected to conduct all official business on the basis that they may be expected to demonstrate publicly that their actions and decisions in conducting public business were taken with the sole objective of advancing the public interest.
Updated
at 1.07am BST
11.58pm BST
23:58
Don't you worry about Donald
Malcolm Turnbull has done a radio interview with Triple M in which Donald Trump featured heavily. Turnbull noted of Trump (after some prompting) that he was the product of middle-class disillusionment in the US. The prime minister said the middle class in America had been squeezed during the recession, and income inequality was a big deal in the country, and that context was informing the presidential contest in the country.
Turnbull was asked about relations with Washington in the event Trump went from presumptive nominee to nominee, and from nominee to president. Host Eddie McGuire pointed Turnbull to regional disquiet about Trump’s foreign policy isolationism.
The prime minister noted that relationship with the US was bigger than any one president, or any one prime minister. Presidents and prime ministers could adjust the Anzuz alliance “a bit” but Australia would always have a friend and ally in Washington.
Malcolm Turnbull:
The Anzus alliance will grow and strengthen regardless of who the president is.
(Translation: Don’t you worry about Donald. I wonder if he had his fingers crossed when he said that?)
Updated
at 1.07am BST
11.48pm BST
23:48
Australian intelligence cooperated with the US to locate Prakash
Working through the developments. The government this morning has confirmed that Neil Prakash, a senior Australian Islamic State operative behind a string of failed terrorist attacks in Melbourne and Sydney, has been killed in a US military airstrike in Iraq. Shadi Jabar, the sister of the 15-year-old western Sydney boy who shot and killed police accountant Curtis Cheng last October, was also killed in a separate strike in Syria. The attorney-general, George Brandis, has told Sky News this morning Australian intelligence cooperated with the US in the “identification and location of Prakash”.
Updated
at 12.13am BST
11.36pm BST
23:36
Still cooling down, apologies, normal live blog transition will resume shortly. Many things on the go.
11.05pm BST
23:05
Hello, step back, I'm pretty cranky
Good morning and welcome to Thursday in Canberra, which is budget-in-reply today. On Tuesday the Coalition had its moment to make its economic case for government. Tonight, it’s Bill Shorten’s turn. A big moment, given the election is truly a heartbeat away.
But before we get to all that, it’s not very often I hear something in politics so gobsmacking that my mouth falls open. But last night, at the adjournment debate I did.
Tony Abbott, who has been quiet of late, made a speech last night that contained an observation that you could either characterise as incredibly naive, or laying bare the grimly transactional character of modern politics.
Abbott was paying tribute to the sterling qualities of the former resources minister Ian Macfarlane, who is retiring at this election. Macfarlane while in government had swept away Labor’s mining tax, “a job-destroying, investment-killing tax, which didn’t raise any revenue”. (I know a tax can’t simultaneously destroy an industry and have no impact on an industry but let’s move past that, because logical inconsistency is not our problem.)
Tony Abbott:
It was a magnificent achievement by the [member] for Groom in his time as minister ... and I hope the sector will acknowledge and demonstrate their gratitude to him in his years of retirement from this place.
I know you might need a minute to let that sink in, so I’ll give you a few seconds to read back over that statement.
Just in case your mind still blocks the meaning of that sentence let me decode: Abbott (a former prime minister, not some loose-lipped neophyte) is saying now the resources minister has been so kind to give the mining sector a big commercial benefit, now the sector should look after him.
Now you might say to me isn’t that how politics works? Isn’t this just a statement of the obvious? I would say to you that statement is nothing we should be complacent about, or just lapse into cynicism about – it’s dropping the mask moment that should make us all ropably angry.
In that rubric, public policy making is not about public interest, it’s about transactions, appeasing sectional interests. It’s about delivering for your mates (who happen to donate to the Liberal party), then having your mates look out for you. Meanwhile the public look on powerless, at the bottom of the decision-making pile.
That glancing statement from Abbott doesn’t make me cynical, it doesn’t confirm my biases, it doesn’t make me shrug my shoulders lightly and move on, it spurs me again to say the comfy and relaxed disposition sitting behind this observation from Abbott is appalling, and it has to change.
Integrity in the Australian political system should be a much bigger deal than it is, particularly if a former prime minister of this country is relaxed enough to just drop a reference like that into an adjournment speech. The US voting public is so angry with the political class in America, in part because they feel locked out of the system, that Donald Trump is the presumptive nominee for the republican party in this presidential race. A socialist from Vermont is sticking it to Hillary Clinton on the subject of influence, and whatever you think of Sanders politics, the message is resonating. So for Australia: time to wake up politicians – this is not how the voting public wants politics to run.
Let’s push on with this and the rest of the day, another big one, hope you’ve packed provisions because I suspect we’ll be here for more than 12 hours.
Today’s comments thread is wide open for your business. Magic Mike and I are up and about on the twits – he’s @mpbowers and I’m@murpharoo. If you speak Facebook you can join my daily forum here. And if you want a behind-the-scenes look at the day and the looming campaign, give Mike a follow on Instagram. You can find him here.
Here comes Thursday.
Updated
at 11.40pm BST