Michaelia Cash urges Albanese to maintain ‘vital' Pacific relations after Vanuatu dumped a key strategic pact
Vanuatu Prime Minister Jotham Napat has refused to ratify the agreement in its current form, demanding relaxed immigration be added in what experts describe as a 'eyebrow raising' ultimatum.
Shortly after he was elected in February, Mr Napat had flagged his intention to revisit the Vanuatu-Australia Nakamal Partnership Agreement — which was first penned in 2022.
'It is up to the Albanese Government to negotiate a pact in Australia's best strategic interests,' WA's most senior Liberal said.
'Australia's immigration settings with our Pacific neighbours are vitally important and should not be compromised.'
Lowy Institute's Pacific Islands program director Mihai Sora said how Australia responds could set a precedent for other negotiations with Pacific leaders who 'almost universally seek easier access'.
'Vanuatu knows that Australia really wants this security pact to be ratified,' he said.
'I'm not sure that it will be a successful line in the sand that he's drawn. I'd say it's an eyebrow raising condition.
'It's not realistic that Australia would be able to grant visa free access to Vanuatu nations even for short term temporary access.'
He said it was unlikely Australia would relax migration policies due to transnational crime concerns, as under passport investment schemes people without links to the nation can buy citizenship.
'If Vanuatu then has that visa free access to Australia, then Australia becomes vulnerable to these new elements of transnational crime,' he warned.
Mr Napat hasn't yet made it clear whether he's seeking temporary or permanent immigration measures in his demands.
But Mr Sora said either way it was 'disingenuous' to say that the pact wasn't 'win-win' in attempting to leverage better terms — as it would likely be a boon for the small Pacific nation.
Mr Napat's decision comes amid a joint bid by Australia and Pacific countries for the COP31 in 2026 — the world's biggest clean energy trade summit.
Mr Sora said Vanuatu has long been one of the 'most activist' and leading voices in the region on climate change, so their continued endorsement of Australia to host COP 31 was 'very important'.
'That continued endorsement from Pacific countries for Australia to cohost COP31 is really important,' he said.
'So, the relationship with Vanuatu bilaterally is among the most important for Australia right now, as well as obviously, one of the most difficult or delicate.'
ANU College of Asia and the Pacific PhD candidate Henrietta McNeill said the timing amid the COP31 bid likely wasn't a coincidence.
'In terms of the COP31 pitch, Türkiye is still going for it and Australia is trying really hard, so it needs to have its Pacific neighbours on board. So maybe for Vanuatu, now is the time to strike in terms of getting something that it wants in its negotiations,' she said.
Ms McNeill also said there was 'quite a lot of geopolitical competition' for Pacific nations in the region, allowing them to exert their agency.
'There are lots of countries that are trying to get security agreements with Pacific Island countries. Australia and China have a kind of equal influence,' she said.
'Australia is seeking to get their trust signed on the dotted line in this kind of uncertain geopolitical environment. I think China's going about things in slightly different ways.
'They've got a strong influence. They will be watching, definitely.'
China's growing influence in the region has included police training and equipment gifts in Vanuatu.
Anthony Albanese on Tuesday talked up Australia's Pacific relations in a breakfast blitz of TV interviews as his foreign minister Penny Wong travelled to Washington to meet her US counterpart.
The Prime Minister said along with investing in Defence assets to suppose Australia's capability — maintaining Pacific relationships was a priority.
'Our relationships in this region are very important,' he said, citing increased relationships with Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Tuvalu and Nauru.
'The announcements that we've made with Tuvalu and Nauru (are) important relationships for the Indo-Pacific region. We are doing all of that and making an enormous difference,' he said.
Amid the increased tension in the region, the PM also told reporters he was not prioritising China above the US. It comes as he will travel to China to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping in coming weeks but has not yet secured a face-to-face meeting with US President Donald Trump.
'We're an important ally for the United States. We are a middle power who exercise a great deal of influence in the Indo-Pacific, in ASEAN, and we play a very important role in peace and security in the region,' the PM said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
an hour ago
- Sky News AU
Strong fears held for children's entertainment over 'misguided' attempts from eSafety commissioner to have YouTube included in social media ban for kids
As Australia awaits the Labor government's decision as to whether or not children will be banned from YouTube, a prominent content creator has explained why following the eSafety Commissioner's "misguided" advice would be a big mistake. eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant recently argued that children should be banned from the video streaming platform in her speech to the National Press Club. Ms Inman Grant claimed she had written to Communications Minister Anika Wells encouraging children be banned from YouTube because of the evidence. 'I don't make determinations or write recommendations to the minister based on whether I keep the public onside, I follow the evidence,' she said last Tuesday. If the Albanese government decides to heed the advice of the commissioner, YouTube will be restricted by sweeping new legislative changes without having an opportunity to provide a counter argument. A decision by Labor is imminent, but the creator of the mega-popular Bounce Patrol channel for children on YouTube says she feels like the process is being rushed through with minimal consultation with stakeholders. Shannon Jones, the creator and executive producer of the Australian channel which has more than 33 million subscribers globally, said YouTube was exempted from the social media bans last year after consultation but that the government wording and decision-making appears to have changed, indicating a potential backflip is on the cards. "I reached out to them last year when they were first considering it and had some conversations then... and then this time around I've sent communications to the minister but haven't heard back because everything is just being done so fast, like it's all being considered and decided in the space of a week it feels like," she told "...Because it's getting so rushed through, all of the consultation that was done with stakeholders last year is not getting repeated and it seems like there hasn't been much conversation with stakeholders this time to learn all those nuances so that's been really disappointing as well. "And it seems like they've got a position that they're interested in pursuing." Australia's social media ban for children aged under 16 is set to come into effect in December 2025. The ban is set to apply to a number of popular platforms including the likes of Facebook, X, Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat. There is confusion though as to why YouTube has been suggested to be lumped under the ban, given it's not considered a form of social media and doesn't include any typical features of social media platforms that may be considered dangerous for children such as messaging, or exchanging images. YouTube also has safeguards in place to protect children online, such as restricted mode which filters out mature content, parental controls and age-restricted content. Research conducted by the Australian government found 85 per cent of kids and 68.5 per cent of parents said YouTube is appropriate for under-16s, whereas parents felt less comfortable about their children using social media platforms such as TikTok or Instagram. Ms Jones is baffled why the video platform has been recommended to also be banned, stating the advice is "misguided" to "lump it in with social media". "I just think that this is a really misguided way to approach it, designed by people who don't really have a great understanding of how YouTube works and how all of the experiences are built for kids and how the safety guard rails are built and the sort of nuance of the way the platform works," she said. "From our perspective YouTube is not social media like kids aren't messaging each other, they're not posting selfies on made-for-kids content. You can't post comments at all. In supervised experiences, depending on the settings that the parents have set, you can't communicate or leave comments." The creator also believes the decision to include YouTube in the ban would do more harm than good for children as it would force them to use the app logged out, where the same safeguards are not in place. There is also no clarity over whether YouTube Kids would be included under the framework of a ban. "The Safety Commissioner's advice was that kids should use it logged out but the problem with that is YouTube has spent many years designing experiences for kids that put a lot of safety guard rails in place and then one of the few tech platforms that have really invested in that over the last 10 years like YouTube Kids are celebrating its 10th anniversary this year. "That's how long they've been working on these experiences and... (there's) no idea whether that would be allowed under this new framework for instance. "Even for older kids, the 13-17-year-olds for instance, YouTube's built the supervised experiences which have all these protections in place so it's things like there's no personalised ads, there's take a break reminders, there's limitations on certain harmful content. "These tools that exist the parents can create these supervised accounts would no longer be allowed to be used and kids would be forced to use it logged out instead according to the Safety Commissioner's suggestions and that experiences has got no guard rails in place so that's where you have no limitations on what you can see, what path it goes down." Bounce Patrol has more subscribers than other Australian creator on YouTube, highlighting the demand for children's content Down Under. If a ban were to affect YouTube, it would mean that along with other creators, it would no longer thrive to the same extent. It would also provide a huge roadblock to young entrepreneurs with a dream to pursuing a career as a creator at a young age. For example, the likes of 13-year-old Ryan Kaji's channel Ryan's World with more than 38.3 million subscribers, would essentially become obsolete if it was run from Australia. If a ban was in place in the United States more than 15 years ago, Justin Bieber may have taken several more years to be discovered before becoming the pop star he remains to be. Ms Jones said a ban would also isolate Australia in becoming a country to introduce such a draconian measure for children, saying the platform is "not banned anywhere else" and that it demonstrates a lack of understanding as to how YouTube works. "It says that we don't really understand what YouTube is which is a library of high-quality video content," she said. "Most of the families who watch Bounce Patrol content in Australia watch it as a shared experience in the lounge room together "And what that tells you is YouTube is more like Netflix than it is like Instagram and lumping it in and saying this is not a video service, this is a social media service is just really misguided in terms of understanding how people actually use the platform." These fears are also held by 'The Mik Maks', the creators of a channel with 8.5 million subscribers and 7.9 billion views. "As former classroom teachers," they told Sky News, "we've seen firsthand the value of using YouTube videos in early years education. If parents and educators are forced to access made-for-kids content without signing in, children will be more likely to encounter lower-quality or unvetted videos. Our videos have been shared over one million times because they are trusted by parents and teachers. A one-size-fits all ban doesn't make any sense'.
Sky News AU
an hour ago
- Sky News AU
Albanese government self-inflicting a $20b budget blow by taxing unrealised gains, Wilson Asset Management report reveals
Labor faces an almost $20b blow from its controversial proposal to tax unrealised gains in a self-inflicted setback against its productivity agenda. This is a major finding from Wilson Asset Management in its second report on Treasurer Jim Chalmers' plan to double the tax rate on super accounts above $3m. The plan has drawn criticism as Labor will not index the threshold over time and the tax will capture paper gains on assets such as properties, shares and farms. WAM's latest report shows an array of companies that are either small growth businesses or startups will forego $19.73b in tax revenue to the government over four years as fewer firms reach profitable maturity. The report states there are 611,823 companies in Australia that turn over less than $2m per year and would need financing through a self-managed super fund or via personal contributions. If each small company contributed an average of $15,015.91 in tax per year to the government, the total tax revenue would be $9.19b of annual corporate tax from these companies. WAM estimates the taxing of unrealised gains would lead to a potential 53.7 per cent decline in tax revenue from innovative companies, bringing the corporate tax from these small companies down to $4.93b per year. This brings the total losses to $19.73b over four years due to Labor's decision to target unrealised gains. The indirect self-blow from Labor's super tax comes as it embarks on a productivity agenda to bolster the economy. Mr Chalmers in June said the Albanese government wants to overhaul the nation's flailing productivity rate in its second term. Productivity has slumped from around 1.8 per cent in the 2000s and early-mid 2010s to 0.9 per cent in the 2023 financial year. WAM's founder Geoff Wilson said the unrealised gains tax flies directly in the face of this agenda. 'It is a policy that threatens to undermine the foundations of Australia's economic dynamism by inhibiting the very companies that drive innovation, competition, and future growth,' Mr Wilson said in the report. 'It will stifle investment and it will not deliver the productivity reform that is desperately needed.' The proposed unrealised gains tax and the subsequent $20b blow to the budget that WAM has projected could also hurt the government as it seeks to minimise a forecasted decade of deficits. The Albanese government's gross debt will surge past $1 trillion in the 2025-26 federal budget, placing significant burden on voters ahead of the federal election. The amount of taxpayer money being spent on the government's own interest repayments trails behind only welfare, health and defence as a budget expenditure. The level of gross debt reaches $940 billion in 2024-25 before hitting $1.02 trillion in 2025-26 and growing every year thereafter. After Labor's sweeping election victory, the Albanese government now only needs the support of the Greens to get the super tax legislation through the Senate. The Greens called for the threshold to be lowered to $2m, but indexed over time. Mr Wilson has previously warned Labor's proposed super tax would impact the 'lifeblood of Australia' as people would restructure their investments away from risk. He also noted it could 'destroy innovation' and entrepreneurialism as a large amount of investment into technology start-ups comes from self-managed super funds.
Perth Now
3 hours ago
- Perth Now
Web of systems exploited for insidious financial abuse
Perpetrators of financial abuse exploit tax and business systems to damage mostly women victims. (Diego Fedele/AAP PHOTOS) Perpetrators of financial abuse exploit tax and business systems to damage mostly women victims. (Diego Fedele/AAP PHOTOS) Credit: AAP Courts, banks and Centrelink are being used as a web of systems to perpetrate financial abuse, with experts calling for meaningful reforms to protect victims. An estimated one in six women and one in 13 men experience financial abuse by a partner, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics. This form of abuse can include making a partner liable for a debt they did not accrue, withholding funds such as child support, accessing superannuation early, making a partner a company director without their knowledge or falsifying tax returns. Swinburne University researchers analysed submissions to a 2023 parliamentary inquiry by people who had experienced intimate partner financial abuse. Perpetrators continued to be afforded privacy in their handling of personal finances while victim-survivors were often left with public debts, research author Kay Cook said. "Private systems of financial wealth, like banking institutions, private businesses, superannuation and trust accounts give perpetrators of financial abuse opportunities to extract financial benefits and inflict financial harms on victim-survivors," she said. Researchers also found auxiliaries such as bank managers, personal tax accountants and family lawyers opened the door to continued financial abuse, as they could inadvertently facilitate a perpetrator through legal pathways and continued client services. Meanwhile, victim-survivors often experienced the consequences of the financial harms for years to come. "Victims' financial resources are diminished, safe housing is compromised and they are bound to public systems and public debts, through Centrelink child support, the Australian Taxation Office and the family courts," Professor Cook said. The Albanese government has pledged to crack down on perpetrators weaponising financial systems, proposing law reform in the superannuation, tax and social security systems to stop them being weaponised against survivors. But experts say the family law system must also be examined as it is consistently used to inflict financial abuse after separation. Perpetrators had embarked on an "insidious weaponisation" of the family law system, Southern Cross University academic Georgina Dimopoulos said. "The family courts are enabling financial abuse through the misuse of court processes, victim-survivors not being able to afford legal representation and perpetrators draining victim-survivors' financial resources through prolonged litigation," she said. 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) Lifeline 13 11 14 Men's Referral Service 1300 766 491
