Angus Taylor opens up the questioning and it is to Treasurer Jim Chalmers:
Can the Treasurer tell Australian by what percentage the cost of food has gone up during Labor’s cost-of-living crisis since the election of the Albanese Labor government?
Oooh – we have the answer to that!
Food and non-alcoholic beverage have gone up 12% since June 2022
But in June 2020 they were going up 5.9% a year, now they are rising at 3.0%
Yesterday, Taylor and Jane Hume held a press conference where they used the March 2022 quarter (which was 19.4%), ignoring the June 2022 quarter.
Peter Dutton says the Coalition ‘don’t have capacity to model’ climate policy from opposition
Peter Dutton then claims that you can not model policies from opposition. (That sound you hear is 2019 Bill Shorten and Chris Bowen firing themselves into the sun)
And the point that I’ve made in relation to 2035 to your question is that we don’t have the capacity to model in Opposition. The Government has a lot of modelling – and you would have expected them to have released the detail of their 2035 target by February. They’ve chosen not to do that because they don’t want to tell Australians about their secret plan which will backup the cost of electricity.
The opposition do not have access to Treasury modelling, that is true. But they do have the parliamentary budget office and they can get third party modelling done – Frontier Economics says they did the nuclear modeling as a freebie for the opposition, but the opposition has been using it to spruik their policy.
Anyone who remembers the great SHOW US YOUR COSTINGS war of the 2019 election will know that it is, of course, possible to show some sort of costings, but not necessarily treasury level models. But it IS possible to have an idea that you use to shape policy.
Let’s go back to Peter Dutton’s earlier press conference (a rare event in Canberra) where he was asked about whether or not the Coalition would have a 2035 target.
The short answer is no.
He says:
Well, that’s not the only thing the Labor has accused me of, of course. There are many things I stand accused of from the Labor Party so I’d put it in that context.
Our judgement is very clear and we’ve been very specific in relation to it. We have a target for net zero by 2025. We support renewables in the system – very important point to make, often overlooked by our critics. We support, though, a firming-up of that unreliable power, of the part-time power, by reliable power. Now, green hydrogen is not a reality. Investment is backing out of that at a million miles an hour, both commercial and government investment. So let’s be realistic about the Government’s plan for 2035 and 2035 and beyond. It’s based on a significant element of green hydrogen which is not commercially
Ok, so will the party HE leads have a 2035 target?
Dutton:
The government’s policy on green hydrogen is not scalable and not safe to transport at the moment in the way that they’re proposing. That’s, I think, is important to point out in terms of the likelihood of achieving targets.
Now, we’ll sign up to targets that we believe are in our country’s best interests. I do believe that as we get toward 2050, particularly with nuclear coming in in 2035, that that will allow us a step change, which has been the experience in other countries, which is why many people on the left and many greens around the world are supportive of nuclear power, because it’s zero emissions and provides the base load required to firm up the renewables in the system and if you don’t like fossil fuels and green hydrogen is not a reality and the battery technology is not as far advanced as you would want, then I think you’re starting to run out of options, which is why Labor’s negotiating to extend the life of coal-fired power stations at the moment.
Remember the Future Gas Strategy? That time the Australian Government decided to ignore climate science and to keep the gas industry going “through to 2050 and beyond”.
The Strategy was quickly and thoroughly debunked, but it raised the question of who the hell came up with all this?!
Senator David Pocock chased this up in a recent Senate Estimates and the answers to his questions have just been published (See questions 24 to 27).
Senator Pocock asked what input foreign governments had into the Future Gas Strategy. As it turns out, some got quite a lot, while others not so much.
The Department met with Japanese stakeholders during the Future Gas Strategy consultation period, including government officials from Japan. The Department received 15 submissions from Japanese stakeholders, including one from the Japanese Government. Of these submissions, seven have been published on the Department’s website and eight were submitted confidentially, including the submission from the Japanese Government.
Meanwhile, Australia’s Pacific ‘family’, who are most at risk from climate change caused by Australian gas exports, did not get much of a say. The Department told Senator Pocock that Australia’s embassies in the Pacific “were informed about the release of the Future Gas Strategy consultation paper” but no actual meetings or submissions took place.
This is all pretty true to form. Japan has enormous influence on Australia’s energy policy, seeing fit to lecture Australians about coal royalties, gas exports and whatever else they feel like. Do not miss this video of Australian diplomats and their children backing in Japan’s disposal of nuclear-contaminated water into the Pacific.
Dutton today vs Dutton in the past on international law
The Albanese government is facing criticism, and rightly so, for its refusal to stand up for international law and human rights in the face of what Donald Trump is declaring the US will do in Gaza.
But Peter Dutton, who declared Trump’s plan an example of “big thinking” on Sydney radio this morning should not escape scrutiny either.
Mostly because it is a completely hypocritical position from Dutton, who has commented freely about the need to uphold international law when it comes to China and Russia.
For example, in August 2022 Dutton took aim at China and President Xi in particular, for a change in policy on Taiwan:
The Chinese Communist Party has been very clear about their intent in relation to Taiwan and there were plenty within Europe that didn’t believe that President Putin was going to go into the Ukraine.
What I don’t want to see is instability in our region and a situation unfold in Taiwan where innocent women and children are the main victims, similar to what we’ve seen, in the Ukraine. That’s not something that any of us would want to see. I think it’s why it’s important to call out the behaviour.
I think it’s also important to point out that New Zealand hasn’t changed its values, Australia hasn’t changed its values or approach, similarly for Vietnam or for Indonesia, for the French, who are obviously heavily involved in the Indo Pacific.
What’s changed here – the non-adherence to the rule of international law – is the action of the Chinese Government under President Xi. It’s a very different country, and we’ve supported the Government in their stance in calling out that behavior because if we don’t shine a light on it, if we think it’s going away, and that we can avoid conflict by saying nothing – I just don’t think that’s a reality.”
And then in February 2023, Dutton was asked if he supported then prime minister Scott Morrison’s push “to consider sanctions against China over human rights abuses in Xinjiang?”
Dutton responded:
“I think it’s important to stand up for the values that we believe in. We believe in the rule of law, we believe in democracy, we believe in human rights, and where countries – whether it’s China or elsewhere – are committing or are alleged to be committing human rights abuses, then we’re right to call that out. As a responsible global citizen, Australians would expect us, where we see human rights abuses, whether it’s in Iran, China or Russia or other parts of the world, our country – and this is not a partisan issue, it’s not just a Liberal view, it’s a bipartisan view – that we would call out that behaviour, that conduct, and in many instances at the UN or elsewhere, we would speak out against it or indeed we would take action otherwise.”
And then in August, 2024 Dutton spoke of the importance of upholding international law in a Sky News interview:
“I think in the West we need to realise that our civilisation as we know it, our democracy, our rule of law, the adherence to international law – all of that is under threat.”
Albanese: ‘What do you think a two-state solution is?’
The prime minister continues to be defensive about his lack of criticism over Donald Trump’s illegal and immoral Gaza plan, but he did show a little bit of bite in response to this final question.
Question: You said you don’t want to take running commentary on what the US president says, have you reached out to the US for more detail on Mr Trump’s proposal?
Anthony Albanese:
“We’ll continue to take our position which is what we have done for a long period of time. It’s a bipartisan position for a two-state solution.
Q: Your British counterpart says that Palestinians must be allowed to rebuild and return to their homes in Gaza. Do you agree?
Anthony Albanese is asked about Peter Dutton’s ‘demand’ for an independent inquiry into when he was told the of the planned caravan attack and says:
“So, Peter Dutton wants resources of the Australian Federal Police and the intelligence agencies to stop doing what they’re doing, chasing down these criminals, arresting them, putting them in the clink, instead he wants a political process. It says more about Peter Dutton than anything else. My priority is to work with our agencies. I support the Australian Federal Police. I support ASIO and our intelligence agencies, including the Australian Signals Directorate, and the work they’re doing.
...I get briefed regularly. What they want is for us to be successful in doing what they’re doing. Another person was arrested under the operation yesterday. There’s been multiple arrests, multiple charges. What you need to do when there’s an activity that involves people where the AFP have said very clearly that people are being paid, are being paid, they don’t know who’s doing the paying – is to track those people through intelligence. You track who is ringing them, who’s paying them, where are the payments being made? You track the money trail.
You don’t have to be someone who watches CSI* every week to know that that is the important process. Not these political games. I frankly think it’s extraordinary that Peter Dutton thinks this is the way to go. But for Peter Dutton, there is no issue too big for him to show how small his approach to politics is. And to attempt to play politics. What I will do is to back intelligence agencies, what I will do is to not reveal information that is sensitive for things that are ongoing investigations. This is an ongoing investigation. I find it remarkable that Peter Dutton says that should stop while we do some sort of party committee process.
*Anthony Albanese needs to update his pop culture references – CSI ended in 2015.
Anthony Albanese, emergency services minister Jenny McAllister and Queensland premier David Crisafulli are holding a joint press conference in north Queensland to discuss the flood response.
Financial help has been expanded and the ADF is involved in terms of attempting to shore up infrastructure.
Albanese says he spoke with Crisafulli a few days ago about the “appropriate time for me to come” but out-going Coalition senator Hollie Hughes (who lost preselection for her senate spot) has raised some eyebrows this morning in the senate when she criticised Albanese for missing parliament:
“The boss is away, he is on a plane to Townsville, doesn’t want to talk to the Australian people through the parliament today. He’s up there, it’s convenient timing some may say.”
Loading form…