Australia politics live: Chalmers says Wilson ‘not the sharpest tool in the shed’ in question time; government spent $3.8m on personal protection for CFMEU administrator

In Senate estimates, the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing has provided data to Senator Anne Ruston that shows almost one-quarter (24%) of assessments for aged care support at-home packages are conducted remotely, with no in-person contact, and fed into an algorithm that has no human override over the decision.

The data provided to Ruston shows the waiting list is at 200,000, which includes both the number of older people waiting to be assessed and those waiting for the package they have been approved for.

Ruston said:

Older Australians are waiting months just to be assessed for support and when that appointment finally comes, one in four will never meet their assessor in person.

Labor has designed a system where support is determined by a faceless, phone-based assessment that’s fed into a computerised algorithm with no human override.

We are already seeing people with worsening health conditions including those living with ALS, dementia and other progressive, degenerative diseases having their support cut back by this flawed tool.

Watt and Hume clash over minimum wage rise

In the Senate education and employment legislation committee, the increase in the minimum wage has just been discussed.

Asked what the response has been this afternoon, the minister for the environment and water, Murray Watt, said:

I’m not entirely clear where the Liberal and National parties stand on it. Senator Hume has described real wage increases as “the worst things for Australians”.

Jane Hume interjected, saying Watt must not have watched her most recent press conference during the lunch break, because she said nothing like that.

He continued:

Senator Hanson did not support an increase in the minimum wage, which I found surprising because she says she stands up for battlers.

We support and welcome the decision the commission has handed down.

Watch video: Neale Daniher, MND campaigner and AFL great, honoured in Victorian parliament

Continuing from our previous post …

Labor MP Emma Vulin told the chamber that Neale was one of the first people who reached out to her when she was diagnosed with MND in 2024:

He didn’t know me from a bar of soap, but he invited my partner, Matt and me into his home.

We sat with Neale and his beautiful wife, Jan, and had an honest conversation about what was ahead. He didn’t sugarcoat things. He told me what I needed to know about maintaining independence, about equipment I would need and planning ahead, and the realities of this disease, but he also gave me and my family something incredibly important. He gave his kindness, generosity and hope.

Since then, I have heard the same story from countless others living with MND. Neil reached out, he made time, and he took people under his wing.

A state funeral service will be held for Daniher on Wednesday 10 June at the Melbourne Cricket Ground. This will be just two days after the AFL’s Big Freeze, an annual fundraising and awareness campaign spearheaded by Daniher that has raised more than $100m for research projects.

Victorian parliament pays tribute to Neale Daniher

The Victorian parliament has paid tribute to the former AFL footballer and coach Neale Daniher, who died last week, 13 years after being diagnosed with motor neurone disease.

The premier, Jacinta Allan, led condolence motions in the lower house on Tuesday afternoon, describing Neale as a “deep thinker” and “a fierce competitor” whose influence “reached far beyond the football field”.

She said instead of stepping away from public life following his diagnosis, she said Daniher co-founded the charity FightMND and created an “army to fight this cruel disease”:

He chose to let people see what MND does, because he knew that if people understood it, they might help fight it for a long time. A diagnosis of MND carried a terrible darkness, too few answers, too little awareness, too little research, too little that families could hold on to. And Neil changed that. He made people look at it, he made people learn its name, and because of him, there is now a stream of light where there was once very little. There’s more research, more support, more awareness, more hope.

The opposition leader, Jess Wilson, said Daniher was also a local constituent in her electorate of Kew, who she said “faced one of life’s cruelest challenges with a level of courage, grace, and good humour that few of us could ever hope to match”.

We didn’t just lose a hero, we lost one of our own, a local, a friend, a neighbour, a family member.

What allegations does Ben Roberts-Smith deny?

For context on our previous post, Ben Roberts-Smith was arrested at Sydney airport in April, and charged with five separate counts of the war crime of murder. Each federal charge carries a potential penalty of life imprisonment.

He was released on bail, under strict reporting conditions and having surrendered his passport, after his father Len, a former Western Australian supreme court judge, posted a $250,000 surety.

Roberts-Smith previously mounted a failed defamation case after three newspapers printed allegations of war crimes against him in 2018. He lost, with a federal court judge finding, on balance of probabilities, Roberts-Smith had committed four murders while serving in the Australian military.

The five counts of murder Roberts-Smith has been criminally charged with relate to three alleged incidents.

In 2009, he is alleged to have shot dead a disabled man called Ahmadullah, who had a prosthetic leg, machine-gunning him to death outside a compound called Whiskey 108, after Ahmadullah and his father were found hiding in a tunnel and surrendered, unarmed, to Australia troops.

Roberts-Smith is also alleged to have been complicit in the execution of Ahmadullah’s father, Mohammed Essa, by a junior soldier ordered to shoot him.

In September 2012, in the southern Afghan village of Darwan, Roberts-Smith is alleged to have kicked a handcuffed prisoner called Ali Jan off a 10-metre cliff before ordering that the injured man be shot dead, an order that was followed.

One month later at Syahchow, Roberts-Smith – who was patrol commander – and two subordinate soldiers allegedly took two handcuffed prisoners to the edge of a corn field.

Both prisoners were allegedly executed by the Australian soldiers, at least one on Roberts-Smith’s orders. Roberts-Smith is then alleged to have thrown a grenade that exploded on the bodies in an effort to disguise the murders, the court documents claim.

Former SAS corporal Ben Roberts-Smith will not see the full brief of war crimes allegations against him for months because the case contains classified national security information.

Roberts-Smith, a recipient of the Victoria Cross, was charged in April with five counts of the war crime of murder, allegedly committed across three incidents between 2009 and 2012, during his service with the Australian SAS in Afghanistan.

The 47-year-old, currently on strict bail conditions, denies the allegations.

But serving the brief of evidence against him has been delayed by months because of strict national security laws, Sydney’s Downing Centre local court heard Thursday.

Crown prosecutor Chelsea Brain said Roberts-Smith could not be given the full brief of evidence against him until orders protecting sensitive information were made by the court.

The application over the secret material was made by the commonwealth government.

Roberts-Smith’s solicitor Karen Espiner told the court that her client, crown prosecutors, and the government would likely agree to how the classified documents should be handled.

Judge Susan Horan will have to be convinced the orders are necessary during a hearing on 1 September.

Under the National Security Information Act, a judge can make orders around the disclosure, storage, protection, handling and destruction of classified material during a criminal matter.

Roberts-Smith has not entered pleas to any of the charges but has said he would use the upcoming trial to clear his name.

Online retailers including Amazon and eBay ordered to take down ‘potential deadly’ magnet games

The consumer watchdog has ordered online retailers including Amazon and eBay to remove products marketed for children that contain magnets that could be deadly if swallowed.

Earlier today, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) announced it had asked several online marketplaces to take down “banned and potentially deadly” toys and games containing small high-powered magnets.

Catriona Lowe, one of the ACCC’s deputy chairs, said:

Small high-powered magnets can cause catastrophic, life-threatening internal injuries if swallowed, particularly for young children. Multiple magnets can stick together in the intestine or digestive tissue. They are also a choking risk.

We are extremely concerned that our investigation has detected sellers listing these banned products on online marketplaces, and we urge all online marketplaces to do more to prevent listings of these products to keep consumers, and especially young children, safe.

The ACCC has been investigating products marketed for children such as “magnetic chess” which are being sold to Australians online, despite such products being permanently banned under consumer law.

In a statement, the ACCC said it had sent Amazon, eBay, Kogan, and Fruugo take down requests for the affected listings and sought additional measures to be taken to prevent sellers relisting the same or similar products.

All four retailers have committed to taking these actions and to contacting affected customers to warn them about the safety risks, the ACCC said.

Kogan, Amazon and Fruugo have also provided, or offered to provide, refunds to customers that purchased the affected products subject to the ACCC’s investigation.

Thanks Krishani Dhanji for guiding us through the first sitting day this week. I’ll be with you for this rest of the afternoon.

Thanks for following along on the blog, that’s all from me today!

I’ll leave you with the great Luca Ittimani for the rest of the afternoon, and see you back here bright and early tomorrow.

The department of employment and workplace relations paid around $3.8m in personal protection for the former administrator of the CFMEU, Mark Irving, Senate estimates has heard.

Irving spent 20 months in the role, during which he fired hundreds of people and was subjected to death threats.

On top of this, $5m has been set aside in the 26/27 budget to protect his successor, union executive Michael Crosby.

Asked about the cost of security, the environment minister Murray Watt said it was “the responsibility” of the government to keep the administrator safe. He said:

The organised crime elements who have infiltrated the construction industry have made their profits by dealing with the union and some employers. Not just the union. And I think it is fair for the government to pay for protecting the life of someone who has taken on a role because of a decision of this parliament.

The AFP currently has three investigations into unlawful conduct across the building industry.

Working with Home Affairs, the department undertakes regular security checks for the administrator and provides protection. The threats were being made by organised criminals outside the CFMEU, DEWR said. First Assistant Secretary Sarah Godden said:

The AFP, while obviously not divulging, conveyed to us that the threats made against Irving’s life were not only credible but by people with the means and motive to carry them out.

• The opposition focused questions again on the capital gains tax changes today, pressing Labor on the estimated $77bn tax take from the changes.

• The treasurer, Jim Chalmers, went in with a few personal attacks on Tim Wilson, calling him “not the sharpest tool in the shed”.

• Labor and the Coalition traded barbs over migration numbers, but housing minister, Clare O’Neil, tested Milton Dick’s patience.

• Two MPs were kicked out today – Liberal Andrew Wallace who was booted after the first question, and Labor’s Luke Gosling who was also yeeted early in the piece.

• Independent MP Rebekha Sharkie asked about the government’s support at home package.

• Allegra Spender asked about gambling inducements advertising – in her answer, Anika Wells didn’t mention the word inducements once.

Labor in ‘revolt’ over Aukus: Paterson

The shadow defence minister, James Paterson, claims Labor is in “revolt” over Aukus after backbencher Ed Husic called for a rethink over the security pact.

Paterson said the defence minister, Richard Marles, should haul Husic into line and demonstrate that Labor is “100%” committed to the submarine deal.

Speaking to reporters in Parliament House, the Victorian senator said:

It’s absolutely legitimate to ask questions about how this government is going about delivering Aukus, about the details of Aukus. What is much more concerning is to have a former cabinet minister still in the Labor caucus questioning the merits of Aukus altogether and suggest that it be reopened for a caucus result. How would that be interpreted in foreign capitals in Washington DC, in London, in Beijing?

Question time ends

A slightly shorter question time than usual today. After a final dixer to the health minister, Mark Butler, Anthony Albanese calls time on QT.

Anika Wells dodges question on gambling inducements by talking about other reforms

Independent MP Allegra Spender asks the government about gambling inducements – she says Tim Costello (a leading anti-gambling advocate) described gambling company inducements, such as bonus bets and boosted odds, “as the most evil and predatory feature of the gambling industry”, while the Murphy review recommended the immediate banning of all inducements and inducement advertising.

So why hasn’t the government undertaken those recommendations, she asks?

The communications minister, Anika Wells, says the government’s gambling reforms will “minimise children’s exposure to wagering advertising”.

We will deliver a significant package … with measures that will reduce the harm from gambling. The package has been carefully developed with harm minimisation at front of mind to stop the deluge of gambling advertising.

While she’s speaking, independent Kate Chaney shouts out “what about inducements?”

Spender stands up to make a point of order, saying she was specifically asking about inducements, but Milton Dick rules Wells is being relevant.

Wells continues: “These reforms are important. The community expects to see them implemented in a timely manner.”

She doesn’t actually say the word inducement in her answer once.

Housing minister asked to stop talking about Coalition in answering migration question

Liberal MP Leon Rebello asks the government if it has made the housing situation worse through its migration intake, referencing a previously unreleased note from the Reserve Bank that migration policy is the main way that the government influences the housing market.

He has to ask the question a second time because the government MPs are shouting.

The housing minister, Clare O’Neil, says it’s an important question and that Labor is bringing migration numbers down.

It takes a little bit of moxie to be coming into this parliament and asking me, as housing minister, questions about the housing crisis that those opposite played a very significant hand in creating for our country.

She spends most of the time attacking the opposition, which prompts manager of opposition business, Dan Tehan to make a point of order on relevance.

Tony Burke says that it was due to when the Coalition was in government during Covid that there was a backlog of migrants who arrived under the Labor government, but Tehan counters shouting, “You brought them all in!”

Milton Dick sides with the opposition and tells O’Neil to go back to the question and stop talking about the Coalition.

She doesn’t:

Unfortunately the member finds himself in a political party that played a significant role in bringing us to where we are today.

Dick isn’t happy about the answer, and says O’Neil “was going close to defying the speaker”.

Independent MP asks: ‘What does it take for a dying person to actually get support at home?’

Back to the crossbench, independent Rebekha Sharkie asks the aged care minister what it takes for a dying person to “actually get support at home”.

She says Greg in her electorate has 12 months to live, but has been assessed by the department as medium priority, will wait most of his remaining life for support, and has said contact with the ministerial office has “been fruitless”.

The minister, Sam Rae, says the population is “ageing rapidly and demand for care is growing accordingly”.

In some cases people such as Greg have gone through the assessment process and are still waiting to receive the care they need our government is responding to this challenge.

He then starts running through the stats of how many older Australians are on support at home packages. Sharkie tries to make a point of order, saying that Rae isn’t addressing Greg’s scenario. The speaker, Milton Dick says he heard Rae say Greg’s name so is being relevant.

Rae continues:

I can assure you that I have the greatest personal sympathy for Greg and other people that are in the circumstances that he faces. That is why through this budget we have attributed additional funding to look at the prioritisation and mechanism of the national priority system to ensure people get the care they need.

Nationals ask for clarity on ‘new build’ under housing changes

Nationals MP, Michelle Landry, says that the government’s bills do not define what a new build is, so asks: “If someone builds a new second dwelling on an existing title, is the whole title now considered a new dwelling?”

That is: if someone has a single dwelling and builds a duplex on the land, do they qualify for the tax concessions?

The housing minister, Clare O’Neil, gives a very short response, and doesn’t provide much clarity.

The answer in its entirety:

A new dwelling is one that genuinely adds new to housing supply.