Federal politics live: Anthony Albanese wraps up China visit in Chengdu
Follow all the updates in our live blog.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
26 minutes ago
- ABC News
Lessons from South Korea's security dilemma
South Korea is a test case in how to maintain democracy against sustained pressure from dictatorship. The innovative and entrepreneurial country lives in the shadow of China and Russia, and its capital Seoul lies only 50km from the North Korean border. It hasn't been easy, but the difficulties South Korea faces and the way it deals with them could prove invaluable for other regional neighbours in responding to future economic and military aggression. Journalist Matt Smith has this special report… Guests Dr Troy Lee Brown — Research Fellow, Defense and Security Institute, University of Western Australia Professor Bec Strating — Director, La Trobe Asia and Professor of International Relations at La Trobe University Dr Mike Bosack — Special Advisor for Government Relations, Yokosuka Council for Asia-Pacific Studies Dongkeun Lee — Policy Fellow, Asia-Pacific Leadership Network Dr Duyeon Kim — Adjunct Senior Fellow, Indo-Pacific Security Program, Centre for New American Security
ABC News
4 hours ago
- ABC News
Anthony Albanese and Sussan Ley face fresh challenges in new parliament
Anthony Albanese hasn't been in any rush to convene the new parliament, which Governor-General Sam Mostyn will open on Tuesday. It's only mildly cynical to observe that governments of both persuasions often seem to regard having pesky members and senators around too much as a hindrance to business. Accountability is all very good in theory — facing it in practice is another matter. In this first fortnight of the new parliament, however, much of the attention will be less on the government than on the opposition. Liberal leader Sussan Ley has handled her early weeks without tripping. But her critics hover like crows on the fence in lambing season. Angus Taylor, who narrowly lost the leadership ballot, retains his ambition. The right-wing media wait for Ley's mistakes. Ley will need to maintain a strong grip on her team's messaging, especially on foreign and defence policy, or the Coalition will open itself to criticism. Taylor, now the defence spokesman, attracted attention this week when he went out on a limb on Taiwan, telling the ABC, "we should have a joint commitment with them [the US] to the security of Taiwan". Ley, who says she wants to avoid unrelenting negativity, must choose the Coalition's targets carefully. It has been presented with some useful fodder, with the (inadvertently) leaked Treasury brief to the re-elected government that urged the need for tax rises and spending cuts. This is manna from political heaven because it is on the Coalition's favoured economic ground, and raises issues for which the government doesn't have immediate or clear-cut answers. As important as Ley's performance will be, so will be that of Shadow Treasurer Ted O'Brien. Taylor's handling of the job last term was a serious weakness for the Coalition. Facing a well-prepared and confident counterpart in Jim Chalmers, O'Brien must find his feet quickly. Sensibly, he has hired on his staff an experienced, credible economist, Steven Hamilton, who has been an assistant professor of economics at George Washington University in Washington DC. Hamilton has also been a regular contributor to The Australian Financial Review, so he has a feel for, and contacts in, the financial media. The government has a mix of legislation to introduce in this initial fortnight. Albanese promised during the campaign that Labor's first cab off the rank would be its commitment to cut student debt by 20 per cent. It also foreshadowed early action to lock in penalty rates. It didn't anticipate having to rush in a bill to strip funding from childcare centres that do not meet safety standards. This follows the recent revelations of abuse. The first parliamentary fortnight comes in the run-up to the government's August 19–21 productivity roundtable (named by Chalmers the "economic reform roundtable"). With expectations inevitably exploding, observers will be watching closely the dynamics between the treasurer and the prime minister in parliament. The two agree that delivering election promises should be the floor, rather than the ceiling, of ambition for the second term. But their degrees of ambition differ. Chalmers fears Albanese's is limited; the prime minister fears his treasurer's will overreach. Will Albanese show a restraining hand on the roundtable in the weeks before it? As the government wants to emphasise delivery to voters in the early days of the parliament, Chalmers hasn't rushed to seek the deal he needs with the Greens on his controversial changes to superannuation tax arrangements. The plan is to increase the tax on balances of more than $3 million, and tax the unrealised capital gains. The Greens want the $3 million reduced to $2 million and that amount indexed. It's a fair assumption that a compromise will be reached when negotiations occur. That will be a relatively easy test for the Greens under their new leader, Larissa Waters, who has also said she wants to be constructive while holding the government to account. Later on, though, will come harder issues, including whether the Greens will sign up to a new environmental protection authority, stymied by political obstacles last term. In general, the Senate will be less complicated for the government in the coming months than last term, given the Greens hold the sole balance of power on legislation contested by the opposition. That means things are more frustrating for other Senate crossbenchers. In his stand on staffing, Albanese is not improving their mood. Pauline Hanson's One Nation doubled its representation to four senators but has no extra staff. Staff allocation is up to the prime minister, who has once again been arbitrary about how many staff individual Senate crossbenchers receive. This is an unfair and indefensible system — there should be independent, consistent rules. ACT senator David Pocock hasn't lost any staff, but he has lost clout, compared with last term when his vote could be crucial and he was able to trade it for concessions from the government. The new numbers deal him and other non-Green crossbenchers out of the game. In the House of Representatives, the Teals retain strong representation but, as in the last parliament, they can only exert (limited) influence, not power. For a while early this year, when it looked as if there would be a hung parliament, they were preparing wish lists. One new Teal will be sworn in next week, Nicolette Boele, who won the seat of Bradfield from the Liberals. She can't know, however, whether she will see out her term. The Liberals have challenged the result after she won by just 26 votes. The matter will be decided by the Court of Disputed Returns. There are three possible outcomes: the court confirms the result; the result is overturned and the seat awarded to Liberal candidate Gisele Kapterian (who was allowed to vote in the Liberal leadership and supported Ley); or a fresh election is ordered. The Liberals are taking some risk with the challenge. If there were a new election, and they lost it, that would be another setback for them and could destabilise Ley's leadership. Michelle Grattan is a professorial fellow at the University of Canberra and chief political correspondent at The Conversation, where this article first appeared.
ABC News
4 hours ago
- ABC News
Australian aid projects in limbo after Trump administration scrapped USAID, FOI reveals
Two Australian-backed aid projects were left in limbo when the United States government cut USAID funding, slashing billions of dollars of aid worldwide. Freedom of Information (FOI) documents obtained by the ABC show Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) officials sought details on what projects would be affected by Donald Trump's decision to close USAID. The documents show USAID was "holding funds" paid by Australia for two separate aid projects. A total of $1.5 million given to USAID to help deliver a clean drinking water project in Indonesia was returned to DFAT on June 12 this year. Details of the other project were redacted from the documents obtained by the ABC due to including "material in the nature of opinions and recommendations in relation to the department's deliberative processes", DFAT said. Former World Vision Australia CEO Reverend Tim Costello said he was "so glad that Australian taxpayers' money came back" but said the situation had been a close call for DFAT. "[Donald] Trump and [Elon] Musk destroyed USAID and it is going to cost 15 million lives by 2030. Having Australian taxpayers' dollars lost in that would have been an insult to injury," he said. The ABC's FOI request to DFAT specifically asked for: "All documents relating to the transfer of DFAT funds to the United States Agency for International Development (USAID)." The Indonesia water project was set up as a Delegated Cooperation Arrangement, DFAT said. These arrangements allow governments "to delegate support to another donor partner", while "the lead donor holds the contractual relationship with the implementing partner for the program, and funds them directly", DFAT added. In this Indonesia project, Australia contributed more money but USAID took the lead on the ground, the FOI documents show. DFAT told the ABC that such arrangements were "common practice". But Rev Costello said he wasn't aware that direct funding being made to USAID was common practice. "I was surprised by that," he said, but added "there is a lot of cooperation between them [DFAT and USAID]". "I didn't know that we directly funded USAID but I assume it's joint projects and I know that the humanitarian sector see many donor governments working in cooperation," he added. Rev Costello said it would have been a "sobering lesson" for DFAT to have to ask for the money to be returned. Research Associate at the Lowy Institute's Indo-Pacific Development Centre, Grace Stanhope, said financial cooperation with other bilateral government agencies was "really quite rare". "I suspect we do cooperate fairly often with the US but it just happens through a third-party," she added. Ms Stanhope said $1.5m was a small amount of money in the context of Australia's total aid spending. But she said it was important it was returned. DFAT acted as co-donor for the Indonesia Urban Resilient Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Activity, which was also known as IUWASH Tangguh. The project aimed to increase access to "poor-inclusive, climate-resilient, safely managed drinking water and sanitation services" in Indonesia. USAID was the lead donor, which meant it took the lead in implementing the project and agreed to "administer and manage the contribution of DFAT", according to the signed arrangement document. As seen in the plans in the FOI documents, Australia agreed to commit a total of $2.9 million ($US1.9 million) while USAID agreed to pay $US408,861.96. Only $1.5 million was ever actually sent to USAID from DFAT. The second payment of $1.4 million was cancelled following USAID's shutdown. USAID made the privately held development company Development Alternatives Incorporated (DAI) the implementing partner for the project. A spokesperson from DAI confirmed to the ABC that the "IUWASH Tangguh was among those DAI projects terminated". The spokesperson added the project was scheduled to run until March 2027, but was unable to comment on the amount of funds unspent. This program was one of "many programs in the region that have been impacted by USAID cuts", chief of policy and advocacy at Australian Council for International Development (ACFID), Jessica Mackenzie, said. ACFID is an Australian non-government organisation involved in international development and aid. "Water, sanitation and hygiene programs are core to development programming and help change lives," Ms Mackenzie added. Ms Mackenzie added that Australia often worked with like-minded partners on development programs and "Australia has jointly funded numerous development projects with USAID, especially in the Pacific". She added that there has been a shift away from joint funding in recent years as countries are "driven by a desire for more direct control over aid delivery". "Though with decreasing humanitarian funding in 2025, after significant donor cuts, we may see more pooled funds emerging soon," Ms Mackenzie added. Ms Stanhope said that while this incident would likely make DFAT "pause before doing joint projects bilaterally" going forward, she "wouldn't want this to become a reason for DFAT to do less co-financing". "I think the bigger picture is that especially in Asia and the Pacific, lots of donors doing lots of small projects leads to aid fragmentation and inefficiencies and duplication of projects," she said. "Something that we should be doing more of is co-financing with other implementing agencies and only when it's sensible."
