Latest news with #TheCanberraTimes
The Advertiser
23-06-2025
- Politics
- The Advertiser
The controversial changes the Greens will push on housing reform
When South Australian Greens senator Barbara Pocock walks through the stately Adelaide Park Lands that circle the CBD, she sees the human impacts of Australia's housing crisis. "The evidence is in front of our eyes," the newly appointed housing spokesperson for the Greens said of the rough sleepers and those who have pitched tents in the city. Once accessible, Adelaide is now second to Sydney as the most unaffordable city in Australia, and the sixth least affordable in the world, according to the Demographia International Housing Affordability report. But for Senator Pocock, the city of churches and her home state also has the model for housing abundance for the rest of Australia and how to get out of this crisis. In an interview with The Canberra Times, the first since the election, the former academic economist pointed to the model of housing development seen in Whyalla and north of Adelaide, providing worker housing to the steelworks and the homes for those who built Commodores and Monaros at the Holden factory in Elizabeth. In doing so, Senator Pocock acknowledges the collaboration of two former premiers at the opposing ends of the political spectrum. "I think Thomas Playford and Don Dunstan would be rolling in their collective graves at what we are seeing here now; the crisis in South Australia, where we are as a country, a city and a state that led on public investment in housing, and we are now right at the back of the pack with unaffordable housing." Citing two politicians working across the aisle on housing highlights where the federal housing agenda has become most challenging. There was no love lost between the Greens' former housing spokesperson, Max Chandler-Mather and the Prime Minister, with the first-term MP decrying Parliament after the election as a "sick place", while Anthony Albanese said the Queensland MP's conduct was "offensive". There is a different dynamic in the Senate, and Senator Pocock and Labor senator Deborah O'Neill worked together during the inquiries into PricewaterhouseCoopers, the duo a fearsome pair for corporate executives who wilted under parliamentary scrutiny. But it has also been clear when the pair disagreed, with Senator Pocock submitting additional comments that went beyond the committee's recommendations of the first PwC inquiry. Taking this approach into the contested waters of housing, Senator Pocock highlights working with former Employment and Workplace Relations Minister Tony Burke on the right to disconnect, which she said was an evidence-based reform that depended upon cross-party agreement. "I'm hoping that evidence will be relevant as we look at change in the housing sector, and I expect to be in vigorous discussion with Labor on that front." Senator Pocock says the Greens have three priorities on housing. First, a cap on rent and increased security for tenants. Second, removing tax incentives for investors, including negative gearing and capital gains tax. Third, investing in public housing, but with a focus on quality, as well as quantity. These could put the parties on a collision course, with Labor previously ruling out changes to rent caps, as well as negative gearing and capital gains tax. Labor Housing Minister Clare O'Neil identified cutting red tape in the housing and construction sector, as a way for Labor to meet its ambitious 1.2 million homes target. Senator Pocock acknowledges that regulatory reform is part of the solution, but said this does not address the core of the issue. "I'm concerned that the regulation conversation is used as a smoke screen and distraction from the fundamentals which we need to change in relation to housing, and that is building more public housing, fixing the tax breaks and dealing with rent with rent caps," Senator Pocock said. In a post-election interview, Mr Chandler-Mather explained how the Greens and Labor came to an agreement on housing, despite their parties being intractably opposed publicly. "We made it very clear to Labor's Housing Minister in the negotiating room that we were willing to make concessions, and that we would settle for additional public housing funds." Senator Pocock said she was open to negotiation with Minister O'Neil. "[Minister O'Neil] said last week that she was keen to work with states and local government, with all the powers of persuasion and the many tools and levers available to the federal government in relation to housing, and she wanted to use those tools around regulation. "Well if we can do it on relegation, we can do it in relation to a public discussion and federal leadership on rent caps." As well as the housing portfolio, Senator Pocock retains her public service and employment roles. After the 2022 election, Labor came to power with ambitious reform programs in both areas: rebuilding the APS and introducing a raft of industrial relations changes after the Jobs and Skills Summit. This time around, Labor has been quieter on both fronts, signalling it believes the size of the public service is "about right" and mainly extending existing savings measures in consultancy spending and non-wage expenses. While in industrial relations, Labor has initially focused on protecting existing penalty rates. But Senator Pocock said she would be pushing for Labor to increase its ambition in both areas. In the public service, Senator Pocock said there was still work to do to respond to the revelations of the robodebt royal commission, including instituting merit-based appointments at the highest levels in the public sector to tackle issues of culture and leadership. Another challenge the public service is yet to fully grapple with, Senator Pocock says, is the adoption of artificial intelligence. Senator Pocock said there were positives from the technology, but questions about risks. "We did a small inquiry in relation to the federal public sector and AI late last year, and it just surfaced that we aren't governing it. We don't know its reach." On workplace reform, Senator Pocock said the Treasurer's productivity agenda shouldn't stop at tax and regulatory reform, but also look at whether workers were receiving the benefit of productivity gains. "I think the election saw Australians vote for a more flexible workplace. It saw Australians vote for work from home, not for everybody, not all the time, but it certainly was a vote to say our workplaces have changed. Our lives have changed, and workplace relations law needs to reflect that better." When South Australian Greens senator Barbara Pocock walks through the stately Adelaide Park Lands that circle the CBD, she sees the human impacts of Australia's housing crisis. "The evidence is in front of our eyes," the newly appointed housing spokesperson for the Greens said of the rough sleepers and those who have pitched tents in the city. Once accessible, Adelaide is now second to Sydney as the most unaffordable city in Australia, and the sixth least affordable in the world, according to the Demographia International Housing Affordability report. But for Senator Pocock, the city of churches and her home state also has the model for housing abundance for the rest of Australia and how to get out of this crisis. In an interview with The Canberra Times, the first since the election, the former academic economist pointed to the model of housing development seen in Whyalla and north of Adelaide, providing worker housing to the steelworks and the homes for those who built Commodores and Monaros at the Holden factory in Elizabeth. In doing so, Senator Pocock acknowledges the collaboration of two former premiers at the opposing ends of the political spectrum. "I think Thomas Playford and Don Dunstan would be rolling in their collective graves at what we are seeing here now; the crisis in South Australia, where we are as a country, a city and a state that led on public investment in housing, and we are now right at the back of the pack with unaffordable housing." Citing two politicians working across the aisle on housing highlights where the federal housing agenda has become most challenging. There was no love lost between the Greens' former housing spokesperson, Max Chandler-Mather and the Prime Minister, with the first-term MP decrying Parliament after the election as a "sick place", while Anthony Albanese said the Queensland MP's conduct was "offensive". There is a different dynamic in the Senate, and Senator Pocock and Labor senator Deborah O'Neill worked together during the inquiries into PricewaterhouseCoopers, the duo a fearsome pair for corporate executives who wilted under parliamentary scrutiny. But it has also been clear when the pair disagreed, with Senator Pocock submitting additional comments that went beyond the committee's recommendations of the first PwC inquiry. Taking this approach into the contested waters of housing, Senator Pocock highlights working with former Employment and Workplace Relations Minister Tony Burke on the right to disconnect, which she said was an evidence-based reform that depended upon cross-party agreement. "I'm hoping that evidence will be relevant as we look at change in the housing sector, and I expect to be in vigorous discussion with Labor on that front." Senator Pocock says the Greens have three priorities on housing. First, a cap on rent and increased security for tenants. Second, removing tax incentives for investors, including negative gearing and capital gains tax. Third, investing in public housing, but with a focus on quality, as well as quantity. These could put the parties on a collision course, with Labor previously ruling out changes to rent caps, as well as negative gearing and capital gains tax. Labor Housing Minister Clare O'Neil identified cutting red tape in the housing and construction sector, as a way for Labor to meet its ambitious 1.2 million homes target. Senator Pocock acknowledges that regulatory reform is part of the solution, but said this does not address the core of the issue. "I'm concerned that the regulation conversation is used as a smoke screen and distraction from the fundamentals which we need to change in relation to housing, and that is building more public housing, fixing the tax breaks and dealing with rent with rent caps," Senator Pocock said. In a post-election interview, Mr Chandler-Mather explained how the Greens and Labor came to an agreement on housing, despite their parties being intractably opposed publicly. "We made it very clear to Labor's Housing Minister in the negotiating room that we were willing to make concessions, and that we would settle for additional public housing funds." Senator Pocock said she was open to negotiation with Minister O'Neil. "[Minister O'Neil] said last week that she was keen to work with states and local government, with all the powers of persuasion and the many tools and levers available to the federal government in relation to housing, and she wanted to use those tools around regulation. "Well if we can do it on relegation, we can do it in relation to a public discussion and federal leadership on rent caps." As well as the housing portfolio, Senator Pocock retains her public service and employment roles. After the 2022 election, Labor came to power with ambitious reform programs in both areas: rebuilding the APS and introducing a raft of industrial relations changes after the Jobs and Skills Summit. This time around, Labor has been quieter on both fronts, signalling it believes the size of the public service is "about right" and mainly extending existing savings measures in consultancy spending and non-wage expenses. While in industrial relations, Labor has initially focused on protecting existing penalty rates. But Senator Pocock said she would be pushing for Labor to increase its ambition in both areas. In the public service, Senator Pocock said there was still work to do to respond to the revelations of the robodebt royal commission, including instituting merit-based appointments at the highest levels in the public sector to tackle issues of culture and leadership. Another challenge the public service is yet to fully grapple with, Senator Pocock says, is the adoption of artificial intelligence. Senator Pocock said there were positives from the technology, but questions about risks. "We did a small inquiry in relation to the federal public sector and AI late last year, and it just surfaced that we aren't governing it. We don't know its reach." On workplace reform, Senator Pocock said the Treasurer's productivity agenda shouldn't stop at tax and regulatory reform, but also look at whether workers were receiving the benefit of productivity gains. "I think the election saw Australians vote for a more flexible workplace. It saw Australians vote for work from home, not for everybody, not all the time, but it certainly was a vote to say our workplaces have changed. Our lives have changed, and workplace relations law needs to reflect that better." When South Australian Greens senator Barbara Pocock walks through the stately Adelaide Park Lands that circle the CBD, she sees the human impacts of Australia's housing crisis. "The evidence is in front of our eyes," the newly appointed housing spokesperson for the Greens said of the rough sleepers and those who have pitched tents in the city. Once accessible, Adelaide is now second to Sydney as the most unaffordable city in Australia, and the sixth least affordable in the world, according to the Demographia International Housing Affordability report. But for Senator Pocock, the city of churches and her home state also has the model for housing abundance for the rest of Australia and how to get out of this crisis. In an interview with The Canberra Times, the first since the election, the former academic economist pointed to the model of housing development seen in Whyalla and north of Adelaide, providing worker housing to the steelworks and the homes for those who built Commodores and Monaros at the Holden factory in Elizabeth. In doing so, Senator Pocock acknowledges the collaboration of two former premiers at the opposing ends of the political spectrum. "I think Thomas Playford and Don Dunstan would be rolling in their collective graves at what we are seeing here now; the crisis in South Australia, where we are as a country, a city and a state that led on public investment in housing, and we are now right at the back of the pack with unaffordable housing." Citing two politicians working across the aisle on housing highlights where the federal housing agenda has become most challenging. There was no love lost between the Greens' former housing spokesperson, Max Chandler-Mather and the Prime Minister, with the first-term MP decrying Parliament after the election as a "sick place", while Anthony Albanese said the Queensland MP's conduct was "offensive". There is a different dynamic in the Senate, and Senator Pocock and Labor senator Deborah O'Neill worked together during the inquiries into PricewaterhouseCoopers, the duo a fearsome pair for corporate executives who wilted under parliamentary scrutiny. But it has also been clear when the pair disagreed, with Senator Pocock submitting additional comments that went beyond the committee's recommendations of the first PwC inquiry. Taking this approach into the contested waters of housing, Senator Pocock highlights working with former Employment and Workplace Relations Minister Tony Burke on the right to disconnect, which she said was an evidence-based reform that depended upon cross-party agreement. "I'm hoping that evidence will be relevant as we look at change in the housing sector, and I expect to be in vigorous discussion with Labor on that front." Senator Pocock says the Greens have three priorities on housing. First, a cap on rent and increased security for tenants. Second, removing tax incentives for investors, including negative gearing and capital gains tax. Third, investing in public housing, but with a focus on quality, as well as quantity. These could put the parties on a collision course, with Labor previously ruling out changes to rent caps, as well as negative gearing and capital gains tax. Labor Housing Minister Clare O'Neil identified cutting red tape in the housing and construction sector, as a way for Labor to meet its ambitious 1.2 million homes target. Senator Pocock acknowledges that regulatory reform is part of the solution, but said this does not address the core of the issue. "I'm concerned that the regulation conversation is used as a smoke screen and distraction from the fundamentals which we need to change in relation to housing, and that is building more public housing, fixing the tax breaks and dealing with rent with rent caps," Senator Pocock said. In a post-election interview, Mr Chandler-Mather explained how the Greens and Labor came to an agreement on housing, despite their parties being intractably opposed publicly. "We made it very clear to Labor's Housing Minister in the negotiating room that we were willing to make concessions, and that we would settle for additional public housing funds." Senator Pocock said she was open to negotiation with Minister O'Neil. "[Minister O'Neil] said last week that she was keen to work with states and local government, with all the powers of persuasion and the many tools and levers available to the federal government in relation to housing, and she wanted to use those tools around regulation. "Well if we can do it on relegation, we can do it in relation to a public discussion and federal leadership on rent caps." As well as the housing portfolio, Senator Pocock retains her public service and employment roles. After the 2022 election, Labor came to power with ambitious reform programs in both areas: rebuilding the APS and introducing a raft of industrial relations changes after the Jobs and Skills Summit. This time around, Labor has been quieter on both fronts, signalling it believes the size of the public service is "about right" and mainly extending existing savings measures in consultancy spending and non-wage expenses. While in industrial relations, Labor has initially focused on protecting existing penalty rates. But Senator Pocock said she would be pushing for Labor to increase its ambition in both areas. In the public service, Senator Pocock said there was still work to do to respond to the revelations of the robodebt royal commission, including instituting merit-based appointments at the highest levels in the public sector to tackle issues of culture and leadership. Another challenge the public service is yet to fully grapple with, Senator Pocock says, is the adoption of artificial intelligence. Senator Pocock said there were positives from the technology, but questions about risks. "We did a small inquiry in relation to the federal public sector and AI late last year, and it just surfaced that we aren't governing it. We don't know its reach." On workplace reform, Senator Pocock said the Treasurer's productivity agenda shouldn't stop at tax and regulatory reform, but also look at whether workers were receiving the benefit of productivity gains. "I think the election saw Australians vote for a more flexible workplace. It saw Australians vote for work from home, not for everybody, not all the time, but it certainly was a vote to say our workplaces have changed. Our lives have changed, and workplace relations law needs to reflect that better." When South Australian Greens senator Barbara Pocock walks through the stately Adelaide Park Lands that circle the CBD, she sees the human impacts of Australia's housing crisis. "The evidence is in front of our eyes," the newly appointed housing spokesperson for the Greens said of the rough sleepers and those who have pitched tents in the city. Once accessible, Adelaide is now second to Sydney as the most unaffordable city in Australia, and the sixth least affordable in the world, according to the Demographia International Housing Affordability report. But for Senator Pocock, the city of churches and her home state also has the model for housing abundance for the rest of Australia and how to get out of this crisis. In an interview with The Canberra Times, the first since the election, the former academic economist pointed to the model of housing development seen in Whyalla and north of Adelaide, providing worker housing to the steelworks and the homes for those who built Commodores and Monaros at the Holden factory in Elizabeth. In doing so, Senator Pocock acknowledges the collaboration of two former premiers at the opposing ends of the political spectrum. "I think Thomas Playford and Don Dunstan would be rolling in their collective graves at what we are seeing here now; the crisis in South Australia, where we are as a country, a city and a state that led on public investment in housing, and we are now right at the back of the pack with unaffordable housing." Citing two politicians working across the aisle on housing highlights where the federal housing agenda has become most challenging. There was no love lost between the Greens' former housing spokesperson, Max Chandler-Mather and the Prime Minister, with the first-term MP decrying Parliament after the election as a "sick place", while Anthony Albanese said the Queensland MP's conduct was "offensive". There is a different dynamic in the Senate, and Senator Pocock and Labor senator Deborah O'Neill worked together during the inquiries into PricewaterhouseCoopers, the duo a fearsome pair for corporate executives who wilted under parliamentary scrutiny. But it has also been clear when the pair disagreed, with Senator Pocock submitting additional comments that went beyond the committee's recommendations of the first PwC inquiry. Taking this approach into the contested waters of housing, Senator Pocock highlights working with former Employment and Workplace Relations Minister Tony Burke on the right to disconnect, which she said was an evidence-based reform that depended upon cross-party agreement. "I'm hoping that evidence will be relevant as we look at change in the housing sector, and I expect to be in vigorous discussion with Labor on that front." Senator Pocock says the Greens have three priorities on housing. First, a cap on rent and increased security for tenants. Second, removing tax incentives for investors, including negative gearing and capital gains tax. Third, investing in public housing, but with a focus on quality, as well as quantity. These could put the parties on a collision course, with Labor previously ruling out changes to rent caps, as well as negative gearing and capital gains tax. Labor Housing Minister Clare O'Neil identified cutting red tape in the housing and construction sector, as a way for Labor to meet its ambitious 1.2 million homes target. Senator Pocock acknowledges that regulatory reform is part of the solution, but said this does not address the core of the issue. "I'm concerned that the regulation conversation is used as a smoke screen and distraction from the fundamentals which we need to change in relation to housing, and that is building more public housing, fixing the tax breaks and dealing with rent with rent caps," Senator Pocock said. In a post-election interview, Mr Chandler-Mather explained how the Greens and Labor came to an agreement on housing, despite their parties being intractably opposed publicly. "We made it very clear to Labor's Housing Minister in the negotiating room that we were willing to make concessions, and that we would settle for additional public housing funds." Senator Pocock said she was open to negotiation with Minister O'Neil. "[Minister O'Neil] said last week that she was keen to work with states and local government, with all the powers of persuasion and the many tools and levers available to the federal government in relation to housing, and she wanted to use those tools around regulation. "Well if we can do it on relegation, we can do it in relation to a public discussion and federal leadership on rent caps." As well as the housing portfolio, Senator Pocock retains her public service and employment roles. After the 2022 election, Labor came to power with ambitious reform programs in both areas: rebuilding the APS and introducing a raft of industrial relations changes after the Jobs and Skills Summit. This time around, Labor has been quieter on both fronts, signalling it believes the size of the public service is "about right" and mainly extending existing savings measures in consultancy spending and non-wage expenses. While in industrial relations, Labor has initially focused on protecting existing penalty rates. But Senator Pocock said she would be pushing for Labor to increase its ambition in both areas. In the public service, Senator Pocock said there was still work to do to respond to the revelations of the robodebt royal commission, including instituting merit-based appointments at the highest levels in the public sector to tackle issues of culture and leadership. Another challenge the public service is yet to fully grapple with, Senator Pocock says, is the adoption of artificial intelligence. Senator Pocock said there were positives from the technology, but questions about risks. "We did a small inquiry in relation to the federal public sector and AI late last year, and it just surfaced that we aren't governing it. We don't know its reach." On workplace reform, Senator Pocock said the Treasurer's productivity agenda shouldn't stop at tax and regulatory reform, but also look at whether workers were receiving the benefit of productivity gains. "I think the election saw Australians vote for a more flexible workplace. It saw Australians vote for work from home, not for everybody, not all the time, but it certainly was a vote to say our workplaces have changed. Our lives have changed, and workplace relations law needs to reflect that better."
The Advertiser
11-06-2025
- Politics
- The Advertiser
'Don't agree': Former Labor MP who pushed for sanction powers speaks out against Albanese's Israel move
A former Labor MP who spent years advocating for laws giving Australia the power to sanction foreign actors for international law breaches has spoken out against the Albanese government's decision to join four other countries in using them against two Israeli ministers. Michael Danby, who served as the member for Melbourne Ports (now Macnamara) for 20 years before retiring from politics in 2019, was a key architect - along with the late Victorian Labor senator Kimberley Kitching - of Australia's Magnitsky-style sanctions legislation passed in 2022, which enables travel bans to be imposed and assets frozen without warning. He took aim at Foreign Minister Penny Wong for sanctioning Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich overnight, telling The Canberra Times this was not the way the law was designed to be used. "I don't agree with [the decision]," Mr Danby, who is Jewish and has long been a vocal supporter of Israel, said. "Magnitsky sanctions were only meant to be focused on authoritarian states - not democratic states like Israel, where elections or the rule of law can deal with violations by individuals, including local politicians. "Foreign Minister Wong's action against a democratic state throws into sharp relief her failure to employ Magnitsky laws against big fish from authoritarian states - like Beijing's cruel communist commissars in Tibet and East Turkestan ... Whose children often try and get educated here, who like to come on holidays to the Gold Coast here." Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong told Seven's Sunrise on Wednesday morning that the decision to sanction the two ministers over their expansion of illegal settlement in the West Bank had been made "after a long process of deliberation and consideration". "We're doing that because we are all deeply concerned about the extremist settler enterprise of the Netanyahu government," she said. "We're concerned about it because it is undermining the prospects of two states. And ultimately, we, along with those other countries and the broader international community, believe we can only see peace in the Middle East when we deal with two states and when both Israelis and Palestinians can live in peace and security." It is believed to be the first time Magnitsky laws, which are in force across many Western countries, have been used against individuals from democratic countries. Australia has previously using the laws to sanction individuals and entities in Russia, Iran, and Myanmar. Mr Danby said he agreed with criticism from United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio that the move did "not advance US-led efforts to achieve a ceasefire" in the Hamas-Israel war. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese rejected this criticism on Wednesday, telling ABC radio: "I think those responses are predictable, frankly." Opposition Leader Sussan Ley said in a statement: "The sanctioning of democratically elected officials of a key ally, Israel, is a very serious development." "The Magnitsky sanctions regime was designed to respond to serious matters of international concern, such as human rights abuses and terrorist acts," Ms Ley said. "The government must explain, in full, why it is being applied in these circumstances ... We have not received a briefing about this matter but would expect there to be a very high threshold for this decision." She called on the government to "explain why they have seemingly lowered the threshold for imposing Magnitsky-style sanctions, and whether this new approach will be applied to comments made by officials from other countries." "This may have serious implications for our international relationships," Ms Ley said. She said the government's explanatory materials "make clear that Minister Wong exercised a discretionary power to impose the sanctions because of public comments made by the two Israeli Ministers, which "appears to be a new development in our foreign policy." "We are concerned that there is a pattern of decisions by the Albanese government targeting the Israeli government, rather than Hamas, including the decision to block the Deputy Israeli Foreign Minister from travelling to Australia." Mr Albanese told the ABC his government continued to "engage with the Israeli government", while standing firm on the decision, saying the two Israeli ministers had "incited violence against Palestinians in the West Bank". He said the Israeli government needed to "uphold its obligations under international law", saying that "expansionist rhetoric ... from these hardline right-wing members of the Netanyahu government" contradicted this. Senator Wong would not be drawn on whether sanctions against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself had been considered when Australia joined Canada, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom in sanctioning the Israeli ministers. She said only that while the two ministers were "not the only members of the Israeli government whose actions have been problematic, they are certainly the most extreme." As to other matters, we don't speculate about the approach," Senator Wong told reporters in Canberra on Wednesday morning. The Israeli ministers are accused of inciting and supporting systemic violence against Palestinians and aggressively expanding illegal Israeli settlements. They will face travel bans and have any Australian assets frozen under laws. A former Labor MP who spent years advocating for laws giving Australia the power to sanction foreign actors for international law breaches has spoken out against the Albanese government's decision to join four other countries in using them against two Israeli ministers. Michael Danby, who served as the member for Melbourne Ports (now Macnamara) for 20 years before retiring from politics in 2019, was a key architect - along with the late Victorian Labor senator Kimberley Kitching - of Australia's Magnitsky-style sanctions legislation passed in 2022, which enables travel bans to be imposed and assets frozen without warning. He took aim at Foreign Minister Penny Wong for sanctioning Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich overnight, telling The Canberra Times this was not the way the law was designed to be used. "I don't agree with [the decision]," Mr Danby, who is Jewish and has long been a vocal supporter of Israel, said. "Magnitsky sanctions were only meant to be focused on authoritarian states - not democratic states like Israel, where elections or the rule of law can deal with violations by individuals, including local politicians. "Foreign Minister Wong's action against a democratic state throws into sharp relief her failure to employ Magnitsky laws against big fish from authoritarian states - like Beijing's cruel communist commissars in Tibet and East Turkestan ... Whose children often try and get educated here, who like to come on holidays to the Gold Coast here." Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong told Seven's Sunrise on Wednesday morning that the decision to sanction the two ministers over their expansion of illegal settlement in the West Bank had been made "after a long process of deliberation and consideration". "We're doing that because we are all deeply concerned about the extremist settler enterprise of the Netanyahu government," she said. "We're concerned about it because it is undermining the prospects of two states. And ultimately, we, along with those other countries and the broader international community, believe we can only see peace in the Middle East when we deal with two states and when both Israelis and Palestinians can live in peace and security." It is believed to be the first time Magnitsky laws, which are in force across many Western countries, have been used against individuals from democratic countries. Australia has previously using the laws to sanction individuals and entities in Russia, Iran, and Myanmar. Mr Danby said he agreed with criticism from United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio that the move did "not advance US-led efforts to achieve a ceasefire" in the Hamas-Israel war. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese rejected this criticism on Wednesday, telling ABC radio: "I think those responses are predictable, frankly." Opposition Leader Sussan Ley said in a statement: "The sanctioning of democratically elected officials of a key ally, Israel, is a very serious development." "The Magnitsky sanctions regime was designed to respond to serious matters of international concern, such as human rights abuses and terrorist acts," Ms Ley said. "The government must explain, in full, why it is being applied in these circumstances ... We have not received a briefing about this matter but would expect there to be a very high threshold for this decision." She called on the government to "explain why they have seemingly lowered the threshold for imposing Magnitsky-style sanctions, and whether this new approach will be applied to comments made by officials from other countries." "This may have serious implications for our international relationships," Ms Ley said. She said the government's explanatory materials "make clear that Minister Wong exercised a discretionary power to impose the sanctions because of public comments made by the two Israeli Ministers, which "appears to be a new development in our foreign policy." "We are concerned that there is a pattern of decisions by the Albanese government targeting the Israeli government, rather than Hamas, including the decision to block the Deputy Israeli Foreign Minister from travelling to Australia." Mr Albanese told the ABC his government continued to "engage with the Israeli government", while standing firm on the decision, saying the two Israeli ministers had "incited violence against Palestinians in the West Bank". He said the Israeli government needed to "uphold its obligations under international law", saying that "expansionist rhetoric ... from these hardline right-wing members of the Netanyahu government" contradicted this. Senator Wong would not be drawn on whether sanctions against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself had been considered when Australia joined Canada, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom in sanctioning the Israeli ministers. She said only that while the two ministers were "not the only members of the Israeli government whose actions have been problematic, they are certainly the most extreme." As to other matters, we don't speculate about the approach," Senator Wong told reporters in Canberra on Wednesday morning. The Israeli ministers are accused of inciting and supporting systemic violence against Palestinians and aggressively expanding illegal Israeli settlements. They will face travel bans and have any Australian assets frozen under laws. A former Labor MP who spent years advocating for laws giving Australia the power to sanction foreign actors for international law breaches has spoken out against the Albanese government's decision to join four other countries in using them against two Israeli ministers. Michael Danby, who served as the member for Melbourne Ports (now Macnamara) for 20 years before retiring from politics in 2019, was a key architect - along with the late Victorian Labor senator Kimberley Kitching - of Australia's Magnitsky-style sanctions legislation passed in 2022, which enables travel bans to be imposed and assets frozen without warning. He took aim at Foreign Minister Penny Wong for sanctioning Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich overnight, telling The Canberra Times this was not the way the law was designed to be used. "I don't agree with [the decision]," Mr Danby, who is Jewish and has long been a vocal supporter of Israel, said. "Magnitsky sanctions were only meant to be focused on authoritarian states - not democratic states like Israel, where elections or the rule of law can deal with violations by individuals, including local politicians. "Foreign Minister Wong's action against a democratic state throws into sharp relief her failure to employ Magnitsky laws against big fish from authoritarian states - like Beijing's cruel communist commissars in Tibet and East Turkestan ... Whose children often try and get educated here, who like to come on holidays to the Gold Coast here." Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong told Seven's Sunrise on Wednesday morning that the decision to sanction the two ministers over their expansion of illegal settlement in the West Bank had been made "after a long process of deliberation and consideration". "We're doing that because we are all deeply concerned about the extremist settler enterprise of the Netanyahu government," she said. "We're concerned about it because it is undermining the prospects of two states. And ultimately, we, along with those other countries and the broader international community, believe we can only see peace in the Middle East when we deal with two states and when both Israelis and Palestinians can live in peace and security." It is believed to be the first time Magnitsky laws, which are in force across many Western countries, have been used against individuals from democratic countries. Australia has previously using the laws to sanction individuals and entities in Russia, Iran, and Myanmar. Mr Danby said he agreed with criticism from United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio that the move did "not advance US-led efforts to achieve a ceasefire" in the Hamas-Israel war. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese rejected this criticism on Wednesday, telling ABC radio: "I think those responses are predictable, frankly." Opposition Leader Sussan Ley said in a statement: "The sanctioning of democratically elected officials of a key ally, Israel, is a very serious development." "The Magnitsky sanctions regime was designed to respond to serious matters of international concern, such as human rights abuses and terrorist acts," Ms Ley said. "The government must explain, in full, why it is being applied in these circumstances ... We have not received a briefing about this matter but would expect there to be a very high threshold for this decision." She called on the government to "explain why they have seemingly lowered the threshold for imposing Magnitsky-style sanctions, and whether this new approach will be applied to comments made by officials from other countries." "This may have serious implications for our international relationships," Ms Ley said. She said the government's explanatory materials "make clear that Minister Wong exercised a discretionary power to impose the sanctions because of public comments made by the two Israeli Ministers, which "appears to be a new development in our foreign policy." "We are concerned that there is a pattern of decisions by the Albanese government targeting the Israeli government, rather than Hamas, including the decision to block the Deputy Israeli Foreign Minister from travelling to Australia." Mr Albanese told the ABC his government continued to "engage with the Israeli government", while standing firm on the decision, saying the two Israeli ministers had "incited violence against Palestinians in the West Bank". He said the Israeli government needed to "uphold its obligations under international law", saying that "expansionist rhetoric ... from these hardline right-wing members of the Netanyahu government" contradicted this. Senator Wong would not be drawn on whether sanctions against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself had been considered when Australia joined Canada, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom in sanctioning the Israeli ministers. She said only that while the two ministers were "not the only members of the Israeli government whose actions have been problematic, they are certainly the most extreme." As to other matters, we don't speculate about the approach," Senator Wong told reporters in Canberra on Wednesday morning. The Israeli ministers are accused of inciting and supporting systemic violence against Palestinians and aggressively expanding illegal Israeli settlements. They will face travel bans and have any Australian assets frozen under laws. A former Labor MP who spent years advocating for laws giving Australia the power to sanction foreign actors for international law breaches has spoken out against the Albanese government's decision to join four other countries in using them against two Israeli ministers. Michael Danby, who served as the member for Melbourne Ports (now Macnamara) for 20 years before retiring from politics in 2019, was a key architect - along with the late Victorian Labor senator Kimberley Kitching - of Australia's Magnitsky-style sanctions legislation passed in 2022, which enables travel bans to be imposed and assets frozen without warning. He took aim at Foreign Minister Penny Wong for sanctioning Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich overnight, telling The Canberra Times this was not the way the law was designed to be used. "I don't agree with [the decision]," Mr Danby, who is Jewish and has long been a vocal supporter of Israel, said. "Magnitsky sanctions were only meant to be focused on authoritarian states - not democratic states like Israel, where elections or the rule of law can deal with violations by individuals, including local politicians. "Foreign Minister Wong's action against a democratic state throws into sharp relief her failure to employ Magnitsky laws against big fish from authoritarian states - like Beijing's cruel communist commissars in Tibet and East Turkestan ... Whose children often try and get educated here, who like to come on holidays to the Gold Coast here." Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong told Seven's Sunrise on Wednesday morning that the decision to sanction the two ministers over their expansion of illegal settlement in the West Bank had been made "after a long process of deliberation and consideration". "We're doing that because we are all deeply concerned about the extremist settler enterprise of the Netanyahu government," she said. "We're concerned about it because it is undermining the prospects of two states. And ultimately, we, along with those other countries and the broader international community, believe we can only see peace in the Middle East when we deal with two states and when both Israelis and Palestinians can live in peace and security." It is believed to be the first time Magnitsky laws, which are in force across many Western countries, have been used against individuals from democratic countries. Australia has previously using the laws to sanction individuals and entities in Russia, Iran, and Myanmar. Mr Danby said he agreed with criticism from United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio that the move did "not advance US-led efforts to achieve a ceasefire" in the Hamas-Israel war. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese rejected this criticism on Wednesday, telling ABC radio: "I think those responses are predictable, frankly." Opposition Leader Sussan Ley said in a statement: "The sanctioning of democratically elected officials of a key ally, Israel, is a very serious development." "The Magnitsky sanctions regime was designed to respond to serious matters of international concern, such as human rights abuses and terrorist acts," Ms Ley said. "The government must explain, in full, why it is being applied in these circumstances ... We have not received a briefing about this matter but would expect there to be a very high threshold for this decision." She called on the government to "explain why they have seemingly lowered the threshold for imposing Magnitsky-style sanctions, and whether this new approach will be applied to comments made by officials from other countries." "This may have serious implications for our international relationships," Ms Ley said. She said the government's explanatory materials "make clear that Minister Wong exercised a discretionary power to impose the sanctions because of public comments made by the two Israeli Ministers, which "appears to be a new development in our foreign policy." "We are concerned that there is a pattern of decisions by the Albanese government targeting the Israeli government, rather than Hamas, including the decision to block the Deputy Israeli Foreign Minister from travelling to Australia." Mr Albanese told the ABC his government continued to "engage with the Israeli government", while standing firm on the decision, saying the two Israeli ministers had "incited violence against Palestinians in the West Bank". He said the Israeli government needed to "uphold its obligations under international law", saying that "expansionist rhetoric ... from these hardline right-wing members of the Netanyahu government" contradicted this. Senator Wong would not be drawn on whether sanctions against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself had been considered when Australia joined Canada, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom in sanctioning the Israeli ministers. She said only that while the two ministers were "not the only members of the Israeli government whose actions have been problematic, they are certainly the most extreme." As to other matters, we don't speculate about the approach," Senator Wong told reporters in Canberra on Wednesday morning. The Israeli ministers are accused of inciting and supporting systemic violence against Palestinians and aggressively expanding illegal Israeli settlements. They will face travel bans and have any Australian assets frozen under laws.
Yahoo
03-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Nick Kyrgios to end eight-year French Open exile and make shock return at Roland Garros
Nick Kyrgios is set to make a shock return to Roland Garros in his first French Open appearance in eight years. Kyrgios is back on tour after enduring an extended period of inactivity due to wrist and knee surgeries. Advertisement He picked up his first singles win since October 2022 at the Miami Open, coming from a set down to beat Mackenzie McDonald 3-6 6-3 6-4. And while he is yet to hit the clay this season, he will feature at Roland Garros as he makes an Aussie alliance with Jordan Thompson in the doubles. Thompson, who is world number 11 in the doubles rankings, has been chopping and changing his partners this year after regular teammate Max Purcell was handed an 18-month doping ban. "The French Open was never really on the cards, but after the stuff with Max Purcell, Jordan was looking for a partner and he asked me if I wanted to play," Kyrgios told The Canberra Times. Advertisement "We played at the French Open before, so it'll be good to get out there and play with another fellow Aussie and have a bit of fun." Kyrgios's only career Grand Slam triumph came in the doubles, lifting the Australian Open alongside Thanasi Kokkinakis in 2022. Kyrgios will compete at the French Open before embarking on a busy grass-court season (AP) The French Open will act as Kyrgios's final warm-up for a busy grass-court season, returning to singles action at the Stuttgart Open with an eye on Wimbledon, which kicks off on June 30. "I'm excited to get out there and play," Kyrgios added. "We put a lot of work in - myself, [physiotherapist] Will [Maher], and the team. I feel good. "Me and [coach] James [Frawley] have been on the court pretty much every single day. I'm hitting the ball well, it's just a matter of playing matches. "With this part of my career I'm excited to travel the world and do some fun things whilst I'm out there."
Yahoo
03-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Nick Kyrgios to end eight-year French Open exile and make shock return at Roland Garros
Nick Kyrgios is set to make a shock return to Roland Garros in his first French Open appearance in eight years. Kyrgios is back on tour after enduring an extended period of inactivity due to wrist and knee surgeries. Advertisement He picked up his first singles win since October 2022 at the Miami Open, coming from a set down to beat Mackenzie McDonald 3-6 6-3 6-4. And while he is yet to hit the clay this season, he will feature at Roland Garros as he makes an Aussie alliance with Jordan Thompson in the doubles. Thompson, who is world number 11 in the doubles rankings, has been chopping and changing his partners this year after regular teammate Max Purcell was handed an 18-month doping ban. "The French Open was never really on the cards, but after the stuff with Max Purcell, Jordan was looking for a partner and he asked me if I wanted to play," Kyrgios told The Canberra Times. Advertisement "We played at the French Open before, so it'll be good to get out there and play with another fellow Aussie and have a bit of fun." Kyrgios's only career Grand Slam triumph came in the doubles, lifting the Australian Open alongside Thanasi Kokkinakis in 2022. Kyrgios will compete at the French Open before embarking on a busy grass-court season (AP) The French Open will act as Kyrgios's final warm-up for a busy grass-court season, returning to singles action at the Stuttgart Open with an eye on Wimbledon, which kicks off on June 30. "I'm excited to get out there and play," Kyrgios added. "We put a lot of work in - myself, [physiotherapist] Will [Maher], and the team. I feel good. "Me and [coach] James [Frawley] have been on the court pretty much every single day. I'm hitting the ball well, it's just a matter of playing matches. "With this part of my career I'm excited to travel the world and do some fun things whilst I'm out there."
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Sport
- Yahoo
Tennis world reacts to Nick Kyrgios announcement as Jannik Sinner makes statement
Nick Kyrgios has stunned the tennis world having announced he will make his first appearance at Roland Garros in eight years, while Jannik Sinner has made a brutal statement upon his comeback. Kyrgios has not played a match since Miami after making his return to tennis at the Australian Open this year. After dealing with a number of wrist and knee injuries that ruled him out for around 18 months, Kygrios made his comeback in Melbourne where he went down in the first round. Unfortunately, Kyrgios has only played four singles matches in 2025 having won his only game in Miami earlier this year. But after an extended break, Kyrgios announced he will take part in the Stuttgart tournament next week using a protected ranking in a bid to find match fitness before playing doubles at Roland Garros. Clay has never been Kygrios' favourite surface and in the past he has opted to skip a number of the major events to save his body for the grass court season. Although Kyrgios' return on clay in 2025 could be a move to build up his match fitness as he makes a push at Wimbledon. Kyrgios made the 2022 Wimbledon final where he went down to Novak Djokovic. Kyrgios admitted it was a plea from one of his friends, after Max Purcell's tennis ban, that changed his mind to play at Roland Garros in 2025. Kyrgios will pair up with Jordan Thompson in Paris. "The French Open was never really on the cards," Kyrgios told The Canberra Times. "But after the stuff with Max Purcell, Jordan was looking for a partner and he asked me if I wanted to play. "We've played at the French Open before, so it'll be good to get out there and play with another fellow Aussie and have a bit of fun." Confirmed by the entry list that Nick Kyrgios will play doubles at the French Open with Jordan be his first appearance at Roland Garros since 2017. — James Gray (@jamesgraysport) May 15, 2025 🎾 NICK KYRGIOS RETURNS TO ROLAND GARROSAfter an 8-year absence, the Aussie star is set to make his comeback at the French Open. Fans can expect fireworks on the clay once again!#NickKyrgios #RolandGarros #FrenchOpen #Tennis #KyrgiosComeback — João Neves (@jon_snow_pt) May 15, 2025 While Kyrgios is set to make his comeback to tennis, Sinner is already making waves in his first tournament back in his home event. Sinner returned from his three-month doping suspension out to prove a point at the Italian Open. And the Italian favourite did just that against Madrid Open champion Casper Ruud having blitzed his rival 6-0 6-1 in a brutal statement. Ruud was riding high after winning in Madrid and carrying the momentum into the quarter-final clash. Although Sinner was all business and wanted everyone to know he hasn't lost a step as the World No.1 dropped just one game against the two-time Roland Garros finalist. This marked Sinner's 25th straight win and 19th straight set in 2025. All Ruud could do was smile at the changeover in the second set having praised the Italian for his elite level of play in Rome. "It's near as perfect that I witnessed, at least as a player, playing someone, so just got to give it to him," Ruud told reporters. "Everything else that came out of his racket... feels like a hundred miles an hour plus, every single shot, on the forearm, from the backhand, and even on my shots that I feel at times are pretty heavy it comes back like just firing. He was just everywhere... it's just like playing a wall that you know shoots hundred miles an hour balls at you all the time." Sinner d. Casper Ruud 6-0 6-1What on earth did we witnessJust his 4th match after 3 months away1 game dropped against a 2-time Roland Garros finalist✅1st Rome SF✅11th Masters SF✅25th straight win✅19th straight setUnplayable. Unbeatable. Untouchable.🇮🇹❤️ — The Tennis Letter (@TheTennisLetter) May 15, 2025 Sinner addmitted he was feeling good playing in front of his home fans and was working his way back to his best. "My goal this week is to understand where my level is, and it has raised day by day," he said after defeating Ruud. "Everything can change in one day, and one performance doesn't tell you everything about my shape at the moment but I am very happy. I moved great on the court. Now let's see what is coming in the semi-finals." Sinner could be on track to play Carlos Alcaraz in the final in Rome.
