Kremlin: Putin tells Trump Russia will ‘pursue its goals' in Ukraine
***
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News.com.au
2 hours ago
- News.com.au
Natural disasters threatening hopes of slim budget surplus: McBain
The unpredictability of natural disasters is threatening hopes of Labor delivering a third budget surplus, Anthony Albanese's disasters tsar says. Department of Finance figures released last week showed the Albanese government had shrunk the forecast underlying deficit for 2024-25 to $5.5bn as of May, down from $27.9bn. But with natural disasters happening more often and states needing greater federal support in their responses, factoring in the cost poses a serious challenge for Jim Chalmers as he vies to keep his budget streak. Emergency Management Minister Kristy McBain said on Sunday extreme weather events had already cost Commonwealth coffers some $2bn in the first six months of 2025. 'The first six months of the year we've seen a number of events in our communities,' she told Sky News, pointing to ex-tropical cyclone Alfred. Alfred caused havoc by pounding coastal communities in Queensland and New South Wales with violent waves and winds. It also affected when the Prime Minister called the election. 'We've had those southwest Queensland floods, flooding in North Queensland,' Ms McBain said. 'Just last month, we saw the mid-North Coast and Hunter floods and an event, obviously over the past week on the South Coast of NSW in particular, also at a time where we've got drought in Victoria and South Australia.' She said while the states and territories led the disaster responses, the federal government has 'provided over $770m in direct Commonwealth assistance to people in disaster hit areas'. Ms McBain said federal funds also went into economic recovery, such as supporting primary producers and small businesses. 'So for the first six months of this year, we're close to $2bn that we've spent, and we'll continue to work with the states and territories … to make sure that we are dealing with some of those infrastructure impacts,' she said. Asked directly if the costs would ultimately dash the Treasurer's chances of landing another budget surplus, Ms McBain said natural disasters were hard to factor in to planning. 'In a budget, you are looking at a range of things that you can measure and predict,' she said. 'And I think what we have come to see is that natural disasters sometimes are unpredictable, and the impact they have on communities can be long and wide ranging. 'And what we've said from day one since the Albanese government was elected, is that we will walk with communities through the long tail of recovery, because recovery isn't … a few days while cameras and lights are in the area. 'It's … the weeks, the months and potentially years afterwards.'
ABC News
2 hours ago
- ABC News
Why York Park is not considered an alternative to the proposed Macquarie Point Hobart stadium
Of all the questions asked by Tasmanians throughout the stadium debate, a couple stick out. Why does a new stadium need a roof? Why does Tasmania need a stadium at all? But perhaps the most often asked question relates to the team location. Why can't a Tasmanian AFL team be based in the more geographically central city of Launceston and play out of York Park? It's been regularly raised by ABC's state election Your Say respondents. Kate from Blackmans Bay was opposed to a new Hobart stadium and said "they should update the stadium at York Park, Launceston". Gerry in Beauty Point said Tasmania "should have an AFL team based at York Park, upgraded of course". It's not a new proposition. The latest iteration of the argument is rooted in opposition to a new and expensive stadium in Hobart and greater access to AFL games for Tasmanians from the north and northwest. While it's true that York Park is indeed a perfectly solid football ground, with a playing surface regularly referred to one of the best in the nation, York Park's problem isn't York Park. Its problem is Launceston. Player, coach and staff retention is a challenge that was quickly identified by the Tasmanian AFL task force when it compiled the Devils business case in 2018, leading it to make a key finding — it would be difficult to attract and retain personnel if the club wasn't based in Hobart. "Based on the advice provided to the Taskforce by the AFL, AFL Players Association, community consultation and the fact that most of the playing roster presently would be from the mainland states, Hobart would be the likely team base" it reads. "In terms of the key drivers around team location, it should be reconsidered to centre around player attraction and retention, the availability of partner jobs, schools and general demographics. "It is highly likely the majority of the playing roster will be from interstate and so air links and general access for partners, families and friends were also assessed," it continues. The notion was supported by former AFL commissioner and independent assessor Colin Carter in his analysis of the business case, where he said: "Half the state's population lives in Hobart, which has a good lifestyle, services and airport connectivity, university access, jobs for partners and spouses. And, compared to the mainland, it has modest housing prices and relatively lower cost of living." The point was further impressed by Tasmanian commentator Tim Lane, who gave evidence to a legislative council select committee on AFL in Tasmania in 2020. He believed that "the infrastructure, the social circumstances and what-have-you of the capital city should be available to a group of 40 young men coming together to play football there". Former Collingwood president Eddie McGuire put it a little more bluntly in 2023 when he said: "I don't think there's any kids at the moment lying awake hoping that they're going to play in Tasmania on a refurbished oval in Launceston." Of course, things have changed since then. The proposed Macquarie Point stadium has people thinking about alternative options for the team, given its cost and location. But does putting the Devils in Launceston solve much of the problem? Would it make the state's AFL dream that much cheaper? While the AFL has listed the current capacity at York Park as high as 19,500, the true figure is considered lower. James Avery, chief executive of Stadiums Tasmania, explained York Park's current seated capacity is 13,106, with a total capacity of 15,500 if you include standing patrons. After the planned redevelopment, the seated capacity would be 16,578, with a total capacity of 17,500. That is short of the forecast average Devils crowd of 18,000, and 6,000 short of the ideally-sized 23,000 needed for games against higher-drawing clubs. Tasmania Football Club chief executive Brendon Gale told a planning commission panel last week that playing in a smaller stadium would lock fans out of games, and in turn, hurt the club's bottom line. "Our average crowd forecast on a conservative basis is at 18,000 which is already outside the capacity of existing stadia," Mr Gale said. "Forget about the financial constraints, we'd have massive capacity constraints. A larger, and costlier, upgrade would be required to get York Park up to the required level of capacity, and while it would likely cost less than what's estimated for a new build at Macquarie Point, it would only create a secondary problem around capacity for games in Hobart. With no new stadium, Devils matches would need to be staged at Bellerive Oval — a 13,000-seat cricket ground, that while capable of hosting games of football, would be too small to satiate the demand of tens of thousands of Devils members, robbing the club of an estimated $5.9 million in revenue each year. The idea of upgrading that venue has repeatedly been dismissed, given its tight suburban constraints. In 2018, the Tasmanian AFL task force addressed this, firmly declaring playing at Bellerive long-term would be highly detrimental to the team and its fans. It flirted with the idea of basing a team at a 27,000-capacity York Park, but even that would have only been in the short term, and until a new Hobart CBD stadium was constructed. A team playing out of Launceston, with Hobart as its secondary venue, would also make little sense demographically. There are 114,000 people living within a 25-kilometre radius of Launceston, compared to about 250,000 people within the same distance of Hobart. About 70 per cent of the state's population live within a one-hour drive of the capital, compared to about 30 per cent for Launceston. That might be why the proposed split for Devils games in Hobart and Launceston from 2028 is 7 and 4. A team in Launceston might be good for Launceston, but it would be bad for the team — and not much chop for most Tasmanian football fans. And while it would probably save some short-term stadium spend, the long-term cost could be much higher.
ABC News
3 hours ago
- ABC News
Senior Liberal says parents right to be furious at politicians for failing children
Parents should be furious at politicians for failing to keep Australian children safe, senior Liberal Melissa McIntosh says, demanding an explanation for why governments have sat on their hands on several known issues in the childcare sector. Ms McIntosh said governments must explain why a number of reforms were not already in place. "There is something seriously wrong and every single parent in this country has a right to be very angry and to be asking serious questions right now of our politicians, all of our politicians, including myself," Ms McIntosh told ABC Insiders. The Coalition has been cautious not to politicise the issue of child safety in the wake of another horrific instance of alleged child abuse in the care sector. Joshua Dale Brown has been charged with more than 70 offences involving eight children at a Melbourne childcare centre, with new information still emerging that he may have worked more shifts at some centres than first thought. In the days after those charges were made public, Liberal Shadow Minister for early childhood Jonno Duniam said every measure must be considered, and the opposition would work with the government to see reform done urgently. This morning, repeating that the Coalition would support any "reasonable measure" the government put forward, Ms McIntosh also demanded an answer from the government. "The Albanese government has said itself it has been too slow to act. Why? Why has it been so slow to act? Why have we seen multiple accounts of child sex abuse take place before the government [acted]," she said. After Australia's worst paedophile Ashley Paul Griffith in 2023 pleaded guilty to abusing dozens of children over almost two decades, federal and state governments began work to strengthen child safety. A number of those changes have been announced in recent weeks and months, including moves to ban personal mobile phones, publish more data on childcare provider compliance and increase penalties on non-compliant centres. The federal government also announced legislation to cut off funding from providers who repeatedly failed their safety and quality obligations, which would be introduced to parliament this month. The Coalition has already indicated it would support those laws, and Ms McIntosh said bluntly this morning if a centre was only "working towards" compliance "that means they are not at standard". Currently, providers can continue to receive the Child Care Subsidy and open new centres even if centres are only "working towards" being compliant with Australia's quality and safety framework. But a number of other reforms, including to the Working With Children Check, have not been made despite recommendations to do so being made a decade ago. And with gaps in the system again in the spotlight, there is a wider debate about whether the system should be completely reformed, and funded more like the public school system. Ms McIntosh said the federal government could work on child safety while also continuing its plans to expand the network by delivering 160 new centres and guaranteeing three days of subsidised care. But she said the federal government must make safety the priority. "We shouldn't even be talking about whether the sector is a safe place for our children," she said. "They should be able to do both."
