Major call on Mark Latham portrait after public allegations levelled at him by ex-partner Nathalie Matthews
Latham made headlines last week when his former partner, Nathalie Matthews, alleged a 'sustained pattern' of abuse by him including claims he once defecated on her before sex.
Latham has denied any wrongdoing. He has not been charged with any crime.
Amid the controversy, several people including Sydney MP Tanya Plibersek, have called for his portrait to be removed from Parliament House.
Latham was banned from the ALP nearly a decade ago, after he joined the Liberal Democratic Party in May 2017. He went on to join Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party.
Now, a note will hang below the portrait saying: 'In 2017 Mark Latham was expelled from the Australian Labor Party and banned for life. His actions do not accord with Labor values and failed to meet the standards we expect and demand.'
On Tuesday, The Daily Telegraph's James Willis and Western Sydney Women CEO Amanda Rose joined Monique Wright on Sunrise, speaking about the decision.
'I think we have to be careful about removing history. There's been some poor examples of that in Australia, where statues have been removed unfairly,' Willis said.
'In this case, Mark Latham was the leader of the Labor Party ... so, to remove him altogether would have been silly.
'I think the censorship is a bit of a shot at him.
'But ultimately, the bigger question here is that given what has been revealed about Mark Latham in the last week, and not just the allegations by his ex-partner, but the explicit texts in Parliament, and the other behaviour that's been reported, in any other workplace, whether it was in media, whether he was the CEO of a company, he would have been suspended or gone by now.
'Instead, he's still Parliament and we can't do anything about him for years to come.'
Rose advocated a level of fairness, saying if Latham's portrait was to be removed then everyone's history would need to be re-examined.
'I think the reality is if you're going to remove his portrait for things he's done now, or doing now, then you are going to have to go through every single portrait on that wall and say 'What have they done that we don't agree with?' And then (potentially) remove it,' Rose said.
'I'm sure there's plenty on there that have been great and plenty that have done some dodgy things as well.
'James is right. You don't want to remove history.
'His role ... was back then, and I think just removing someone's entire past because of something that they're going through right now, if you apply that ... you would have to apply that to everyone. Both sides of politics..'
Rose agreed with a plaque.
'That's information (because he was expelled),' Rose said.
'I think just now, everyone is kind of focusing on getting rid of everything with him ... If we did that in a lot of circumstance, a lot of people would have to get removed.'
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese outraged
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese weighed in for the first time since the allegations emerged, saying he never wanted Latham to be the party's leader.
'Mark Latham has views which I find repulsive across a range of areas,' Albanese told ABC's 7.30.
'He's someone who I regret being ever being elected leader of the Labor Party.'
Albanese said his feelings were not in 'retrospect' and he had been doing the numbers for Kim Beazley during the 2003 leadership challenge which Latham narrowly won.
'History has proven that judgment to be correct. Mark Latham since ... has gone further and further and further away from any values that represent mainstream Australia,' he said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
West Australian
4 minutes ago
- West Australian
Albanese Government's first bills tackle childcare safety regulations, student debt reform
The Albanese Government has introduced its first bills of the new term to slash student debt by 20 per cent and to tighten early childhood safety regulations by stripping funding from childcare centres that fail to meet minimum standards. While student debt relief was a pledge Labor took to the Federal election campaign, the introduction of tougher child protection laws was spurred by national shock over the arrest and charging of alleged paedophile Joshua Dale Brown. Mr Brown, who was able to work across 23 childcare centres, has been charged with dozens of offences including alleged sexual assault, producing child abuse material and contaminating food with his bodily fluids. Since his arrest, more than 2,000 families have been urged to test their children for sexually transmitted infection, and faith has crumbled in the childcare vetting system. Introducing the draft legislation to the House of Representatives on Wednesday morning, Education Minister Jason Clare stressed the purpose of the bill was 'not to shut childcare centres down' but to 'raise standards up.' Under the bill, care providers could have their Childcare Subsidy (CCS) funding blocked over a single breach on quality standards, Mr Clare confirmed to the ABC. 'This will give us the power to issue a show cause notice to a centre and say we will shut it within 28 days unless they meet that minimum standard,' he said. He told Parliament that the move was 'not about leaving parents stranded without care for their children because of fixable or minor shortcomings at their service. But this legislation is also not an idle threat to services.' The Coalition have signalled broad support for improving safety at childcare centres but has raised concerns about the proposed mechanism to do so, while the Greens have called for the Government to bolster its plan by creating a national watchdog. Jess Walsh, the Federal Minister for Early Childhood Education, told ABC Radio National Breakfast the legislation would give the Government a 'tough new lever to make sure that children are kept safe in our early learning settings,' by taking funding from providers who put child safety ahead of profits. She said it was aimed at 'serious repeat offenders' who 'persistently and consistently fail' to meet the National Quality Standard. 'We can start by issuing a show-cause notice as to why that provider, that service, should maintain their Commonwealth funding through the Child Care Subsidy. And we can make that show-cause notice public,' she said. 'We think that is a really strong step that will drive change. At that point, we think that those providers who are doing the wrong thing regularly will make the investments that they need to keep our children safe.' Senator Walsh said families would be notified about repeat offenders, adding that the Federal Government would be working together with state authorities on a broader child safety package. This would include the first-ever nationwide register of early childhood educators and mandatory safety training. 'We also want to provide much more transparent information to parents, so they know what the quality is and whether there are any issues in the services that they're thinking about or currently sending their children to,' she said.
Perth Now
4 minutes ago
- Perth Now
Nats 'steers' rumbling in party paddock over net zero
A powder keg has been dropped within the coalition over climate policy as dissenters push for a net zero emissions target to be dropped. Opponents of the 2050 target are ramping up pressure on their leaders to ditch the target, saying it's hurting regional Australia and driving up power bills as Australia phases out coal and boosts renewable energy investment. The debate reignited after former Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce flagged a private member's bill to scrap the legislated target. "The last two elections we went forward with a policy supporting net zero and we've been handed our political derriere on a plate," he told reporters in Canberra on Wednesday. He argued Australia should focus on economic viability with big emitters like China, India and the US not making major cuts to emissions while Australia's power prices increased. India has a net zero by 2070 target, China by 2060 and the US had a 2050 target under the Biden administration but climate action has been largely scrapped under President Donald Trump. "Even if you believe every chapter, verse, what net zero was going to achieve, it's not going to achieve it because the world's not participating in it," Mr Joyce said. "So why are we on this sort of singular crusade by ourselves that has no effect on the climate but is incredibly deleterious to the standard of living and the cost of living of the Australian people - it's insane." Opposition Leader Sussan Ley refused to say whether the target will remain coalition policy as a review into its policies continues following their May election defeat. Liberals largely want to keep the net zero emissions policy; they lost a swathe of inner city seats amid concerns they weren't taking climate change seriously enough. "The electorate has told us in multiple elections that this is what they want, and we do have an obligation to leave the planet in a better place," Liberal senator Jane Hume told AAP. Labor has seized on the split over climate policy, with Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen saying the Liberals are being held hostage by their junior coalition partner. Mr Joyce has been joined by an unlikely ally in Michael McCormack, another former Nationals leader whom he rolled for the job in 2021. But the two have broken bread over a shared disdain for current leader David Littleproud after both were dumped from his frontbench. Mr Joyce, who was rolled by Mr Littleproud after the 2022 election loss, said he'd support a leadership bid by Mr McCormack, which he hasn't ruled out but acknowledged no imminent challenge. Mr McCormack denied the duo are white-anting their leader, arguing he's standing up for regional Australians who are bearing the negative impacts of renewable energy projects on their land and near their towns. Despite the duo touting leadership troubles for Mr Littleproud, other Nationals MPs hosed down the speculation, saying the talk was from a vocal minority aggrieved over climate policy and personal snubs. Liberal frontbencher Dan Tehan compared the two Nationals MPs railing against their leader as "two steers in a paddock". Mr McCormack said he took umbrage with the comments, joking that steers had been emasculated and he was "quite virile and ready to go as far as politics is concerned".
ABC News
34 minutes ago
- ABC News
How Labor's new bill to strip unsafe childcare centres of funding would work
A proposal to strip childcare centres of federal funding has been introduced to parliament. It is one of the re-elected Albanese government's first items of legislation, accelerated in the wake of the shocking allegations against former childcare worker Joshua Brown. It could lead to the effective forced closure of childcare centres that cannot guarantee child safety. Here's how that would work. Like many sectors in Australia, responsibility for child care is split between federal and state governments. States are largely responsible for monitoring the quality and safety of centres, which are mostly run by for-profit companies and not-for-profit organisations. But the federal government provides the money via parents, in the form of the Child Care Subsidy — effectively a "voucher" parents can use on accredited providers. This bill does not propose a federal takeover of quality or safety regulation — that will continue to be done by state auditors in line with their own existing rules. But it does give the secretary of the Department of Education broad discretion to deny or revoke subsidy eligibility from providers if they fall short. Given the centres' business model relies on receiving the subsidy, that would effectively force them to close. For large providers, it could also prevent them from adding new centres. In making such a decision, the legislation would allow the secretary to consider past and present assessments from the states, including whether they meet national quality standards or are graded as "working towards" them. The secretary can also consider any serious incidents or allegations, complaints, or anything else deemed relevant. The legislation sets out a process involving warnings and infringement notices, leading up to suspension of funding. A similar process already exists to strip funding from centres for reasons like fraud, but not for quality and safety — although state regulators can currently shut centres when there are serious threats. The bill leaves significant room for discretion and does not detail the thresholds the secretary must use to make a decision or directly define circumstances where funding must be revoked. It does not specify whether multiple breaches or just one breach are required, and in fact leaves open the possibility a centre could be denied funding on the basis of potential harms rather than past breaches. Education Minister Jason Clare told the ABC's News Breakfast his intention was to focus on centres "that are repeatedly failing to meet [the] minimum standards" and that withholding funding would have significant consequences for non-compliant centres, but also said an action "could be as simple as one" breach. "It is the biggest weapon that we have got to wield here," he said. "Taxpayers provide about $16 billion to childcare centres every year. That represents about 70 per cent of the funding to run a centre … They cannot operate without [subsidies]." The bill also gives the secretary of education greater powers to order spot checks and unscheduled visits to childcare centres. Consistent with their current role, federal auditors visiting sites will focus on fraud rather than quality or safety, which remains the purview of state regulators, but the federal auditors will be able to pass on to the states any safety concerns they observe. Mr Clare said Labor had been working "really professionally and constructively" with the opposition and had also briefed the Greens, signalling hope for broad co-operation to pass the legislation.
