Nationals in close battle for safe Labor seat after string of victories
The National Party, along with the Queensland-based Liberal National Party, have secured 24 of the 150 seats in the House of Representatives as of Wednesday morning.
The National Party alone have secured nine lower house seats, losing just one – Calare in NSW – to Independent Andrew Gee, who quit the Nationals in late 2022.
But they could soon be gaining another.
Nationals candidate Andrew Lethlean is in a close contest to nab the Victorian seat of Bendigo from Labor's Lisa Chesters.
Labor has held the seat since 1998, with Ms Chesters heading into this year's election with a margin of 11.2 per cent.
But as of Wednesday morning, Ms Chesters leads with a slim 50.16 per cent of votes, with Mr Lethlean battling it out with 49.84 per cent. Over 85 per cent of votes have so far been counted.
A Nationals' victory for Bendigo would represent an over 10 per cent swing towards the party.
The Nationals have not confirmed how much money they have thrown at Mr Leathen's campaign but Ms Chesters has claimed he had access to a $1 million pot, the ABC reports.
During the campaign, Mr Lethlean came under scrutiny after it was reported a bar he owned sold alcohol while its licence was suspended. The licence has since been paid and reinstated.
Mr Lethlean said the suspension was the result of an 'administrative oversight' and said the annual licence fee was paid as soon as the issue was identified.
Push for more ministries
As of Wednesday morning, the Coalition has secured 40 seats in the lower house, while Labor has 88.
Nationals MP Michael McCormack told the ABC his party would be calling for more shadow ministries because the Nationals made up a larger percentage of the Coalition.
'It's worked out on a per capita basis with how many seats you hold as part of a joint number in the Coalition,' Mr McCormack said
As the Liberals come to term with their losses, the Riverina MP, who retained his seat with a 3.3 per cent swing, advised Liberals to keep their grievances to their party room.
'Anonymous Liberal people who so often background and brief journalists in Canberra, shut your bloody mouths,' he said.
'Don't share it with the rest of the world and if you do share it with the rest of the world, have the courage and conviction to put your name to it.'
Call for Coalition gender quotas
There is set to be a record number of women in Australia's parliament than ever before following Saturday's election. However minimal will be from within the Coalition.
In the House of Representative, Labor has increased its female representation to 47 MPs out of a confirmed 87, meaning the number of female MPs outnumbers male MPs (40).
New faces set to enter parliament this year include Barton's Ash Ambihaipahar, who retained the seat of former Indigenous minister Linda Burney for Labor, Claire Clutterham, who flipped the Adelaide seat of Sturt, and Ali France, who defeated Liberal leader Peter Dutton in Dickson.
Meanwhile, the Coalition has seven female MPs out 39, a decrease from its 2022 result of nine.
The drop in numbers is largely due to the election losses of former Hughes MP Jenny Ware and Bass MP Bridget Archer, and the retirements of McPherson MP Karen Andrews and Forrest MP Nola Marino.
Following the results, Liberal senator Maria Kovacic is calling for the Coalition to implement gender quotas – which the party has long resisted – to ensure more women are elected to parliament.
'We don't have as many women as we have men, and people want us to have more women representing our party in the parliament,' she told ABC Radio on Tuesday.
'We need to move back to the centre. It is very, very clear that the Australian public, the voting public, were not happy with the way that we were conducting ourselves as a potential government.'
However, Shadow Minister for Indigenous Australians Jacinta Nampijinpa Price has rejected the calls for quotas, labelling it a 'knee jerk reaction to the outcome of the election'.
'We have to make sure that we are reaching women for their support and putting forth an argument to demonstrate to them what we're going to do to improve their lives and a future for their children, but I don't believe we need to introduce quotas,' the Northern Territory Senator told Sky News.
'I would hate to think that I ever got to my position on the fact that I'm a woman or anything else for that matter, but what I do think we need to do is preselecting people with very strong values and we need to get out there and push harder and stronger.'
Counting continues on Wednesday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
West Australian
40 minutes ago
- West Australian
Siriana Nair: US-Australia alliance remains strong with likes to Western Australia holding strong
'West is best' is a phrase I have said many times in my three years as United States Consul General in WA. It is true in this State's stunning vistas and wild landscapes, and in the can-do attitude of the innovators, scientists, engineers and entrepreneurs here. This exploration and love of the outdoors reminds me of America's Western spirit — one characterised by the drive to forge ahead and tackle challenges with resilience and grit. Globally, the West represents a commitment to human freedom, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness — the core values that pushed forward the signing of the Declaration of Independence and the birth of the United States as a nation 249 years ago. On this fourth of July, I am profoundly inspired by the spirit of the West — shared by America and WA. I have been fortunate to explore WA from Broome's 12m tides to the pristine white sands of Esperance. I have seen Western Australian innovation from Karratha to Kalgoorlie, and from Busselton to Shark Bay. And all along the way I have witnessed the US-Australia alliance creating jobs, building opportunity and prosperity, and making our countries — and our shared values — more secure. The past three years have been transformational for our alliance in WA. We have taken steps to integrate our defence and industrial base, strengthen our trade and investment relationship, and build secure critical mineral supply chains. Our innovation alliance has collaborated on projects from agriculture to space, encompassing everything from microbes and molecules to entire value chains and industries. Since AUKUS was established in 2021, WA has hosted seven US nuclear-powered submarines and two US Navy submarine support vessels. Most recently, the Virginia-class submarine USS Minnesota visited Perth in February. In addition to exchanging skills and knowledge, these visits have brought hundreds of US sailors ashore in Rockingham, Fremantle and Perth where they have volunteered in the community. And we have invited hundreds of WA Government, industry and community leaders onboard our submarines to learn about our technology and ask questions. Last August, coinciding with visits by the USS Hawaii and USS Emory S. Land, Australian sailors performed maintenance on a US nuclear-powered submarine, the first time in history non-US citizens have done so outside US waters. This illustrates the trust and confidence — built over 100 years — that the US has in Australia. This year, a beautiful new memorial opened in East Fremantle dedicated to the HMAS Perth and the USS Houston, sunk together defending freedom in World War II. I also met the Australian crew of the MV Stoker, which located the USS Edsall — a US destroyer missing since it was sunk off the coast of WA in 1942. It is fitting the Edsall's final resting place was discovered by our Australian friends — the people she sacrificed herself to defend. Economically, the US remains Australia's most important partner. The US is by far the largest foreign investor in this nation with a total stock of $1.2 trillion, creating jobs and opportunity. America's trade with WA has also grown significantly, and we are now the State's fifth largest trading partner. The US Government and American companies continue to invest billions in WA to secure the critical mineral and rare earth supply chains needed for industry, defence, and the technologies of the future. And, this past year, iconic US businesses like Starbucks and Cinnabon have also opened in WA. WA companies are investing in the US, too, including Woodside's US$17.5 billion liquified natural gas facility in Louisiana — the largest foreign direct investment in Louisiana's history. And WA companies are getting their start in the US, with med-tech company Orthocell receiving US Food and Drug Administration approval to sell its new nerve repair product in the American market. Our economic relationship is transformational and is based on a high level of trust. Unsurprisingly in the City of Light, the US-WA space relationship is reaching new heights, with many NASA representatives visiting WA and engaging with local students. In January, we welcomed a NASA flight crew who came to photograph — off the coast of WA — the re-entry of the SpaceX Starship rocket that will one day take humanity to Mars. While Starship did not quite reach its destination on that occasion, it is clear WA continues to be a close partner in space exploration and discovery. And our cultural connections remain strong. This year, we connected young West Australians with US country music star Kane Brown, and through the NBA's Basketball Without Borders program, welcomed former stars like Gary Payton, Bobby Jackson, and Terry Porter to WA. Visiting Native American dancers and Utah's Brigham Young University chamber orchestra shared the best of the American West with WA. But the US-Australia alliance is much more than sport and space exploration. At its core, it is a recognition that our nations' security, safety and prosperity are tied to each other, and that the US has no better partner or friend than Australia. Siriana Nair is the outgoing US Consul-General to WA.
Perth Now
an hour ago
- Perth Now
'We're here': Australia joins the race for US academics
Australia hopes to bring America's brightest minds Down Under as Donald Trump's research cuts spark a US brain drain. The US president has taken a chainsaw to science funding, slashing thousands of government grants and transforming the global state of research. Former Labor leader Bill Shorten, now vice-chancellor of the University of Canberra, said efforts by the Australian Academy of Science to attract American talent was good national co-ordination. "I'm very pro-American, but if their current government doesn't want some of their best to brightest minds, why should we let them go to Europe or Asia?" he told AAP. "We haven't invented this challenging environment for American higher education ... but that doesn't mean that we should sit back and watch the French, the Germans, the Asian nations, recruit these clever people without at least Australia saying 'we're here too'." The academy has designed a relocation package which includes research funding, access to facilities, family relocation support and visa acceleration in a bid to recruit leading US scientists and Australians returning home. About 70 people have already indicated interest. Some were directly impacted by the Trump administration's budget cuts and lost either their positions or support for their areas of research. Though there have been cuts across a range of disciplines, some of the more significant slashes have been applied to areas such as virology and immunology, alongside cuts to the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration which enables researchers to forecast weather and model climate change. Other interested researchers have seen the havoc wreaked on American academia and become "disillusioned or despairing" of their ability to pursue their interests in the US, Australian Academy of Science chief executive Anna-Maria Arabia said. By comparison, Australia's research landscape is more stable and less politically driven. "Whilst it's a volatile situation and quite an unfortunate one that we are experiencing, there is a tremendous opportunity for Australia," she told AAP. By bringing more to Australia, they can contribute to research and development which can eventually open up new economic sectors, new trade potential and a plethora of other benefits, Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering chief executive Kylie Walker said. "You're looking at a decade or more to show benefits from that investment, but when they come - my goodness - they come," she told AAP. Australia isn't the only nation hoping to capitalise on Mr Trump's attack on academia. His cuts have ignited a "global race" for science and technology talent, and Australia's universities, research organisations and agencies such as the CSIRO are all trying to attract them. Almost half of the academy's fellows, which are Australia's most distinguished scientists, were born overseas and many had a multiplier effect when they arrived in Australia as they trained the next generation and helped seed industries. "This is the Australian story, this is what science is in Australia," Ms Arabia said. "It's multicultural, it's of the highest standard, it's undertaken in a supportive environment and in a democratic environment where we nurture science and our scientists."
ABC News
2 hours ago
- ABC News
Alan Kohler on raising the GST
Sydney Pead: The treasurer, Jim Chalmers, has set his sights on tax reform, which will be the centrepiece of a meeting of the nation's best policy minds next month. But is a big shake-up of the tax system even possible in the current political climate? Today, the ABC's finance expert, Alan Kohler, on why these experts would be better off talking about artificial intelligence and even a hike to the GST instead. I'm Sydney Pead, on Gadigal land in Sydney, this is ABC News Daily. Sydney Pead: Alan, the government's economic reform roundtable is next month and no doubt you're very excited about that. Just tell me first, what is this talkfest and who's coming to it? Alan Kohler: So it's going to be in the cabinet room. The treasurer, Jim Chalmers, hasn't said exactly how many people are coming, but he said that there's 25 seats around the table. So whether there's going to be some people standing up for three days behind them, I don't know. The 10 initial invitees include Danielle Wood, the chair of the Productivity Commission. Then there's four people from the ACTU, but two of them will be attending as alternates to the secretary and the president. So the secretary, Sally McManus, is coming and the president, Michele O'Neil. There's also the head of the Business Council, head of the Chamber of Commerce, head of the Australian Industry Group, and the head of the Small Business Organisations of Australia Group. So that's four people from business organisations, plus Cassandra Goldie, head of the Australian Council of Social Services. And that's the 10 so far. Sydney Pead: Right, okay. So these sessions are supposed to be focused on three priorities, productivity, budget sustainability and economic resilience. The treasurer, Jim Chalmers, is excited about it. He's even signalled bold tax reform could be discussed. Jim Chalmers, Treasurer: Now no sensible progress can be made on productivity, resilience or budget sustainability without proper consideration of more tax reform. I don't just accept that, I welcome that. Sydney Pead: Alan, in an ideal world, how ambitious should these participants be when it comes to fixing the tax system? How broken is it? Alan Kohler: Well, it's pretty broken. The last time we had a look at it was Ken Henry in 2010, commissioned by Kevin Rudd, and he produced a massive report on the future tax system, which was almost entirely rejected. And the only bit of it that was used was the introduction of a minerals tax, which ended up being repealed. So look, I don't think there's any kind of expectation that that sort of thing is going to happen. When Jim Chalmers talks about budget sustainability being the goal of tax reform, presumably that means more tax. Jim Chalmers, Treasurer: I am personally willing to grasp the nettle, to use an old saying, I am prepared to do my bit, the government is prepared to do its bit. And what we'll find out in the course of the next few months is whether everyone is prepared to do their bit as well. Alan Kohler: So the question from the tax reform part of the discussion, it seems to me, is going to revolve around what's going to be the extra tax. Are they going to bring in a new tax? Or are they going to increase an existing tax, i.e. the GST? Or are they going to have a go at something like an inheritance tax, which a lot of countries have, or a wealth tax, which some countries have got as well? Look, my view is that I don't think Anthony Albanese is going to let him do anything particularly bold, because the Prime Minister has made it clear that he's not interested in big shake-ups. Sydney Pead: But the government's already making some changes, right? Like its plan to increase tax for people with superannuation balances above $3 million. Alan Kohler: Look, that's pretty small. It's sort of a toe in the water of a wealth tax. And everyone's complaining that it's on unrealised gains, which is basically if the value of your super fund increases, even though you don't sell anything and haven't made cash gains, you still have to pay the tax. It's on gains that haven't been realised. And everyone's whinging like mad about that. And it's really the first time that Australia has had a go at that kind of unrealised gain tax. And Jim Chalmers is saying they're going to stick with that. They're not going to make any changes to it. And so he's kind of staring down the opponents of it at this stage. But it's a fairly small thing. You know, it's not going to raise a lot of money. It's certainly not going to get the budget back into surplus. Sydney Pead: And tax reform, it's always a tricky business because there's always winners and there's always losers. So if rewriting the tax system is a bit too hard for this roundtable, you've got another suggestion that they could be talking about instead, artificial intelligence. So why is that so important? Because there are some big moves on AI in China and the US worth taking note of, right? Alan Kohler: Well, yeah, that's right. So look, in my view, the whole, or most of the discussion about productivity needs to focus on artificial intelligence because we're in the middle of this, what's clearly a revolution in technology that China is well ahead of virtually everyone else on. The United States is also having a go at it. President Trump's having, on July the 23rd, he's having what he calls AI Action Day, which is going to be a whole series of executive orders designed to regulate or mainly promote the use of artificial intelligence in the United States. So that's happening. That's three weeks before the roundtable. I think that they should have a look at what the United States is doing and have a talk about whether we should do the same thing and what bits of that should we pick up and what shouldn't we pick up. I mean, they need to think about what does Australia have to do to get us using AI in such a way that improves productivity. Sydney Pead: And you had a couple of ideas here. One of them was to develop a national system for helping small and medium businesses get their employees to write better AI prompts. Can you just tell me about that? Alan Kohler: I'm not by no means an AI expert. But from what I understand, there are kind of two ways for companies to use AI. One is top down, one's bottom up. Top down involves the CEO deciding to bring AI in to do a function and basically replace workers. So it might be doing the call centre, it might be doing data entry, and that's basically a replacement of human beings. The bottom up way is where people who are working for the company use AI to improve their own efficiency and productivity. And a lot of that comes down to how good you are at writing a prompt for the AI. The question is, what can the government do to help small businesses to better use AI? Can the government set up some sort of prompt writing advice centre that would help people do that? Sydney Pead: Right. So it can be used more effectively. Alan Kohler: Yeah. And I thought that was pretty interesting. Sydney Pead: I guess the other issue is the fear around people losing their jobs. So one of these other ideas is to modernise the welfare safety net. Can you just tell me a bit about that? Alan Kohler: Well, so at the moment we've got a system called JobSeeker, which has a certain amount of money, which is clearly everyone says is not enough, clearly not enough. And also it has a mutual obligation system. So in order to qualify for JobSeeker, you have to keep applying for jobs. That system has been around a long time and it sort of predates AI. The question is, will AI now result in a large amount of permanent unemployment? There's a lot of opinions both ways about this. A lot of people say, well, you know, everyone will find another job. Previous technological revolutions in history have not resulted in long term permanent unemployment. And it is true that, you know, we've got a lot of robots in the world and unemployment is in Australia 4.1%. So it's not as if the robots that are there have caused a large amount of unemployment. But I think there is a fair bit of fear as to, you know, well, what happens if there is this sort of big increase in unemployment as a result of AI and so people are scared of it? And I think that's understandable. What is possible is some kind of safety net for people thrown out of work by AI. How that might work, I don't know. I mean, it's difficult. Can you sort of separate off people who lose their jobs because of AI? You probably can't. How would you fund it? Could you fund it with a tax on AI? The problem with that is that you want to encourage the use of AI. You don't want to tax it. Taxing something discourages its use. So you want to actually, if anything, you want to lower the tax on AI so that people are more inclined to use it so that productivity improves. So, you know, it's kind of difficult to get your head around. But I guess that's what you get 25 smart people in a room for. Sydney Pead: Yeah, that's right. So they could potentially strike the right balance there and improve the economy and productivity at the same time through AI. Moving on, let's talk a little bit about what other changes could come out of this roundtable. There's one change you think might be possible to try, which could balance the budget and look after more people. But a lot of people will hate hearing this from you, Alan. We should perhaps raise the GST. And by how much? Alan Kohler: Well, look, there clearly does need to be more tax revenue. We've been through this before. In 1985, Bob Hawke and Paul Keating held a tax summit because there wasn't enough tax revenue. And they went to that tax summit with three proposals. One was the GST. Another was the capital gains tax. And the third thing was fringe benefits tax. And the tax summit happened in 85. And two of those three things got up. The GST did not. Treasury also said the same thing to John Howard in 1998 and said, you've got to have a GST. And so he went back on his promise not to have a GST. So we got one in 2000 because tax revenue fell short. And now it's fallen short again. So the question is, do we come up with another new tax as we did in 85 and 2000? Or do we basically just increase the ones we've got? And everyone's agreed that we've got too much tax revenue coming out of income taxes. I'm not sure this is right. But anyway, it seems to be a consensus view. And you need to also have a lower company tax rate because company taxes are coming down around the world and you kind of lose, you lose companies. They move. The only thing left really is GST. And the average GST around the world is between 15 and 20 percent. So increasing our GST from 10 to 15 percent would not be out of line with the rest of the world. Also, we exclude a lot of stuff like food. And so the proposal would be to increase the rate and to broaden the base so that you pick up more things. The problem with the GST is that it's regressive, not progressive like income taxes. That is to say it affects poor people much more than the well-off because they tend to spend more of their income on things that are subject to GST. So how would you make it less regressive? And Richard Holden and Rosalind Dixon, who are professors at the UNSW in Sydney, came up with an idea, which is did you have a tax-free threshold of GST? They proposed 12,000 a year, 1,000 a month. So all spending up to that amount per year would be GST free. Sydney Pead: And so what, the taxpayer would then get that money back each year? Alan Kohler: Well, that was the idea. I mean, I rang Richard Holden up and said, you know, how would you do that? How can the government possibly know what each person is spending? And the answer is he said, well, you don't have to know. You just give back the GST on that 12,000, which is $1,800. He reckons it should be in two lots of 900. So every six months you get a lump of 900 bucks in your bank account. Just means that you've, you know, you're getting back the GST you've paid on the first $12,000 of your spending each year. And I think that's a very interesting proposal. Sydney Pead: Yeah. Something that they could talk about at the round table, perhaps. Alan Kohler: Well, he reckons that you'd end up with a net extra $45 billion in revenue, which you could use to cut income taxes as well as balance the budget. Sydney Pead: Okay. Many voters would say the government does just need to balance the budget and spend less. Is that an option? Alan Kohler: Well, of course they say that. And yes, that's good in theory, but really it's the community, it's Australian society that puts the demands on the government. You know, the big things are not that available to change. You know, I mean, we've got the NDIS now and it's the Australian community has decided to look after disabled people better than we have in the past. Now, I think that the growth in the NDIS is keeping the treasurer and treasury awake at night because it's growing too quickly, but no one's suggesting any big cuts in the NDIS. And they're not going to cut the aged pension and they're not going to cut, you know, healthcare in general, because apart from anything else, the population is ageing. Actually, healthcare costs are going to increase inevitably. There's nothing they can do about it. And now also there's pressure to increase defence spending. We've agreed to this AUKUS thing where we're going to spend billions of dollars on nuclear submarines. So I just think that the pressure on the budget is such that there's nothing they can do about it. Really, the only thing they can do is increase tax revenue. But I mean, all of the business group representatives, business counsellors, etc. at the roundtable will say that, oh, no, you've got to cut spending. And so they'll end up having an argument that'll last all day about that and waste, just waste time. Sydney Pead: And they should be talking about AI after all. Alan Kohler: I think so. That's right. Sydney Pead: Alan, thanks so much. Alan Kohler: Not at all. Sydney Pead: Alan Kohler is the ABC's finance expert. This episode was produced by Kara Jensen-Mackinnon and Sam Dunn. Audio production by Adair Sheppard. Our supervising producer is David Coady. I'm Sydney Pead. ABC News Daily will be back on Monday. Thanks for listening.
