Abuse under parliamentary privilege will be outside new commission’s remit. Is that a bad thing?

The forthcoming Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission won't examine behaviour inside the chamber. But the next election might produce a better way to lift standards.

The slow process to remove politicians’ privileged status of being able to bully and harass staff and behave in ways that wouldn’t be tolerated in other workplaces took another step forward yesterday with the introduction of the bill to establish a new Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission. The new commission will be able to investigate complaints against parliamentarians, staff employed by them and workers in Parliament House, with powers to compel cooperation.

At least one Coalition MP opposes the commission as putting “another line of unelected bureaucrats between politicians and voters”, as if the freedom to bully, harass and sexually predate on staff should be part and parcel of democracy and politicians shouldn’t be held to the same basic standards as every other worker in the country.

Given the sheer level of bullying that goes on inside political offices — talk to a political staffer, they’ll tell you a tale of the bullying they’ve encountered at some point, including by some of the most prominent politicians in the country — it’s likely that that will form the bulk of the commission’s work. But it will depend on the willingness of staff to complain. There are whistleblower-style protections in the new bill, but reprisal is a huge risk, not to mention what Brittany Higgins felt — that in raising her sexual assault, she became a political problem for her minister.

The focus at the moment, however, is on the fact that the commission can only investigate matters that “do not form part of proceedings in Parliament”, with independent MPs complaining about what they regard as misogynist abuse by Coalition MPs inside the chamber.

Deputy Liberal leader Sussan Ley seemed to try to justify abuse of independent MPs — nearly all women — by saying, in effect, that Zali Steggall started it, as if pointing out that Peter Dutton’s call for a ban on Palestinian refugees was indeed racist means abuse within the chamber was justified.

It’s true that clichés like “robust debate” and “clash of ideas” act as cover for abuse, but also that objections of the latter can tip over into objections to the former. Guardian Australia, bizarrely, ran figures on the number of MPs being kicked out of Parliament in an article headlined “‘Enough is enough’: teal MPs call out ‘misogyny’ of Coalition MPs in question time” — though it inserted, probably at the behest of cautious editors or lawyers, the line “There is no suggestion the ejections from Parliament are related to the behaviour alleged by the teal MPs.”

And yes, there is no connection between the cited example of Michael Sukkar being kicked out nearly 30 times, and any sort of abuse — risking getting ejected is part of the job of opposition MPs, one heightened by how biased a speaker might be and what role opposition MPs are assigned by their tactics committee. Moreover, you can bet that if it was Labor in opposition, that implied connection between abuse and being ejected wouldn’t be being made (and how many people who tut-tut about parliamentary standards also like to quote some of Paul Keating’s best lines in Parliament?)

That all said, the risk of misogynist abuse is quite real given the sheer dearth of women in opposition ranks: seven out of 25 Liberal MPs, three of out 21 LNP MPs, and one out of nine Nationals MPs are women, while every teal MP is female. And there is no-one who can seriously claim that the standard of conduct in question time is a good advertisement for a political career. If the aptly named Keith Pitt thinks the commission will deter people from politics, he seriously needs to go visit some workplaces in the real world, where abusing colleagues, habitual lying and bullying of staff are grounds for sacking, not par for the course.

Nor is it all on the opposition. Governments, this one included, continue the abuse of question time with the stupidity of Dorothy Dixers. If governments want to use what is supposed to be a key accountability forum in order to spruik their own message and savage their opponents, they can hardly complain if opposition MPs interject. But crossbench MPs, engaged in the same task of trying to hold governments to account, deserve far more respect.

The only time in living memory parliamentary standards were substantially improved was when Julia Gillard led a minority government and crossbench MPs used their leverage to improve question time. The only way we’ll get the same again is if crossbench MPs can wield the balance power after the next election and impose better parliamentary standards on a minority government. And, contra Pitt, that might actually make politics a slightly less unattractive career for people whose idea of an enjoyable workplace doesn’t extend to relentless abuse.

Fortunately, as current polling suggests, a minority government is looking more and more likely.

How do you feel about the behaviour of politicians in question time? Would a minority government improve things? Let us know your thoughts by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.

A Labor factional war is dictating Australia’s foreign policy

The Labor Right is on the march against Albo. Crushing the CFMEU was part of it. Then a TWU civil war. And a massive submarine bill.

With the recent news that Anthony Albanese has requested a fresh takeover of the Victorian branch of the ALP, it should be obvious to everyone that neither of the two biggest stories around — the destruction of the CFMEU and the ramping up of AUKUS — have anything to do with building, corruption or national security. They are external expressions of internal Labor factional battles, as the party prepares for preselections in vacant seats in Victoria and for the federal election in general. Not only does it run deep in Labor. It is determining the direction of our foreign policy for decades to come.

Shorten Oddsening?

The simplest way to put it is that the forces who believe Billy Bob Shorten should be elevated to the highest office have been on the move for some time. They’ve been revving the tanks. Mr Shorten himself is a modest man, a minister currently charged with ensuring the welfare of sea lions, the smooth running of Ascensiontide and matters pertaining to Yass. Others dream of higher office for him.

They certainly have promising raw material. On RN Breakfast last week, Billy Bob sounded commanding, authoritative and spirited. Well-rested, perhaps, and with possibly a smidge of media training. For about three years, he sounded strained and weak, like an unhappy High St Armidale antique shop proprietor. That’s all gone. He has blood in his nostrils and the Xavier swagger back. Albo, after two years in office, sounds understandably tired, his slight thickness of speech not helping. All the weight has come back; at least he no longer looks like he fronts a Communards tribute act (though he kinda still does).

The Australian Workers’ Union and other groups around Shorten have “faded” in influence, as the mainstream wonks have it. But you’re only ever one renegotiated alliance from being back in the game. Labor’s sinking primary vote, the perception that Albo is a leader who can neither project command nor appeal to the bourgeoisie as a sort of officer-class type who could keep the party in order… well, for that, you need someone who was in cadets, even though Labor is not a dangerous Year 11 khakied rabble (though it kinda is).

The TWU-Somyurek war on the Right

Currently, Albo is in “power” through the support of the Transport Workers’ Union-centred right, identified with Richard Marles, Death Star resident Stephen Conroy, and former state member for Lara Johnny “Butterdish” Eren. Albo’s National Left stays in power by doing exactly what the TWU Right wants it to do. 

That’s why, instead of once getting, in Tanya Plibersek’s offhand words, “schools and hospitals” (when asked what the ALP’s policies actually were), we are getting submarines worth hundreds of billions — the only purpose of which is US encirclement of China — and drawn into a Chinese civil war over the governance of Taiwan, turned into a world war for US interests. 

To go toe to toe against this alliance, those suggesting that Billy Bob be, blushingly and reluctantly, dragged into power, would need some big allies. That would mean either the SDA, or a smorgasbord of the Industrial Left — the CFMEU and Rail Tram and Bus Industry Union chiefly — and possibly sub-factions of the balkanised Victorian Socialist Left. 

These smaller groups have been courting the SDA for a decade or more, to no effect. A much better bet has been the CFMEU and its “Industrial Left” faction, which joined with the AWU in the Adem Somyurek-piloted “Centre Alliance-Industrial Left” alliance. Central to the success of that outfit was to takeover Victorian Labor branches controlled by the Conroy/TWU Right, such branches bulking out its rather thin union backing. That was the era of punch-ups in backyard branch meetings, minibuses of new members rocking up, their memberships paid, etc.

That attempt to destroy the TWU/Cons faction came apart when Somyurek was taped on high-quality surveillance video using the office of Anthony Byrne MP to organise branch, erm, recruitment. Byrne had been Somyurek’s mentor, so this was all very unfortunate, etc, etc. It all occurred just around the time that ex-senator Conroy joined the advisory board of ASPI, the defence industry lobby group, funded by the Australian offices of international weapons manufacturers.

Somyurek had spoken of “sacking councils” (in his capacity as local government minister), which some took to mean the Greens-controlled outfits. In fact Somyurek was probably going to wield the sword of administration over Labor-controlled councils accused of corruption. And if those councils happened to be a base for the TWU/Conroy faction — such as Brimbank in Melbourne’s north-west — well, that would just be rotten luck. No fear, no favour.

The CFMEU goes (factionally) rogue

Somyurek is gone, his Mods faction scattered, the Centre Alliance in disarray (though not that much disarray; there was always the sense Somyurek was a front for a pre-existing set-up). So, who else could, in alliance with the AWU and others, threaten the National Left/TWU-Conroy alliance? Well, the construction section of the Victorian branch of the CFMEU had gone through serious internal ructions over the question of how closely it should be laced into the ALP.

John Setka and the branch’s Croatian subfaction had been in favour of taking an independent course (the Setka-led state division slings political donations to the Greens, as the Greens are to the left of Labor on union rights; very far to the left now). The “Aussie” group within it didn’t, and that group included Emma Walters, the now very-ex Mrs Setka.

With the Setkas’ marriage dissolved, the CFMEU was free to set a course for indep… oh no! Suddenly there’s a series of reports in The Age and on 60 Minutes alleging… well, that’s not so clear. CFMEU members are members of motorcycle groups, and there was, shock horror, a six-hour safety-based stop work in a tunnel (reported a few days before Age journos went on strike during the Olympics. Gentleman professionals may strike when they wish; the proles should just keep digging).

The most recent story alleged the CFMEU was targeting a Jewish club on behalf of the building company it had contracted. The report suggested there was evidence the CFMEU would encourage pro-Palestine protesters. The evidence for this in the Nick McKenzie/David Marin-Guzman story:

Separately, a security source said NSW authorities had been advised of informal warnings allegedly issued by the CFMEU that if the protest action eventuated, the union might encourage pro-Palestinian activists to join the rally outside the site of the Jewish club.

An unnamed security source? Informal warnings of alleged threats? Wow, you really nailed that one, Nick! Earlier, the story noted its core allegations:

There is no suggestion police suspect that [construction company] Parkview was aware of [CFMEU official] Greenfield’s alleged corruption, or that the corruption allegations against Greenfield will be proven, only that the firm was willing to accommodate the union boss’s demands in return for his backing. Greenfield is awaiting trial.

This is what passes for investigative journalism in The Age now. Two intersecting rumours mashed together and with a headline suggesting the CFMEU is antisemitic. Everyone associated with this story should hang their heads in shame for spruiking it. Surely, they will have some actual named people doing corrupty things to other named people, or this is all going to look like a beat-up in pursuit of Walkley gold dust. So far the best documented act of workplace violence was former Nine chair Peter Costello shoving a journalist. Funny old world. 

So, with the possibility that the Setka-led CFMEU might go fully rogue, it has suddenly been nobbled. But not just nobbled; Labor’s move to appoint a three-year administrator to the whole union prevents it from making any form of political donation, which knocks out its chance to throw its support behind the Greens, donate to the Victorian Socialists or independents, or run a trade union Senate list, which would have a good chance of getting a sixth seat in a couple of states.

The TWU night of the long butter knives

The antepenultimate act in this epic appears to have been the sudden revelations that Diana Asmar from the Health Workers’ Union, once a close associate of Bill Shorten, who may possibly no longer recognise her — few might; Asmar has ceased to dye her hair the sort of red that, for years, made her look like an exploded bottle of raspberry Fanta — is under investigation for the possible misuse of union funds. Oh noes! Why does this keep happening right now!

The penultimate act? Clearing out any opposition within the TWU. Anglo-Celtic politicians like Stephen Conroy and Richard Marles, who went from stupol and youf Labor to executive positions with the TWU, had never, you will be amazed to hear, actually driven a truck. But its many non-Anglo members have, and that was the basis of the other power within the union, the very wide-branching Suleyman family, a Turkish Cypriot clan, led by TWU powerbroker Mem Suleyman.

Turkish-Australian Adem Somyurek, ex-SDA, started his own “Mods” faction when he realised that the union’s Irish and Dutch-descended leaders would never let non-Europeans in, no matter how often they were bearded in the den (and one SDA official is very often seen with a beard). The Mods faction used the non-Anglo networks the SDA had relied on to organise against them and fuck them. Somyurek’s attempt to get everyone non-Anglo over to that side is what led to his confrontation in the Parliament House dining room with Conroy-aligned former Lara member John Eren, who alleged Somyurek waved a butter knife at him. Somyurek denies Johnny Butterdish’s allegations.

Their alignment is fanatically pro-US, pro-Israel, and networked into the global US security establishment. That establishment is about to give Israel carte blanche to knock the shit out of Lebanon if it needs to. Is it possible that, for this reason, or entirely other reasons, Suleyman would like his union back? He has certainly made a big drive to… oh noes! Suleyman is accused of harassment! Just like Somyurek was, when he quit the SDA, throwing out the factional balance in the Andrews government. Whatever the truth of these allegations, what timing!

The coming major party funding stitch-up

The ultimate act? All this is happening as Labor “reforms” political financing laws. It follows the model of the Victorian “reforms”, which authorised funding sources for the two major parties — unions for Labor and the Cormack Foundation for the Libs — and restricted individual donations for everyone else, thus hampering the ability to run Climate 200-style campaigns and match the major parties dollar for dollar through independents. That’s what Labor has planned, and the Liberals will support them. It locks out teals, Greens and conservative independents, and locks up the CFMEU’s war chest and much more besides. 

With the triple lock of compulsory voting, single-member seat exhaustive preferences and public funding matched to primary vote, Labor now no longer needs a union or much of a branch base. It can be a self-contained party of a stupol university elite, handing out preselections to other mates, with strikes all but banned, and our national security laced into the US, with no regard to genuine national interest.

It is the process of an elite disdainful caste, rendering themselves inviolate from actual public action, and using those with a sentimental attachment to what Labor was, employed as a form of human shield. People could resist this. For Labor and the Australian political system, the bill is coming due. It is not yet totally destroyed as a democratic system. But it kinda is. 

Correction: An earlier version of this article described the Suleyman family as “Lebanese Christian”. This is incorrect, they are Turkish Cypriots. The article has been updated to reflect this.

Here’s how much gambling money is worth to Crikey, and why we won’t take it

We’re not exactly rolling in it, but Crikey has never taken gambling money.

This article is an instalment in a new series, Punted, on the government’s failure to reform gambling advertising.

Bill Shorten said the quiet part out loud last week on Q+A:

We got ourselves in this wicked situation where now some of the free-to-air media need gambling ad revenue … in order just to stay afloat … free-to-air media is in diabolical trouble.

That’s the discussion we’re not having.

He needs to read Crikey more closely.

“This is not a story about gambling. It’s about the media,” wrote Bernard Keane as he kicked off our recent series Punted. “If there’s intense division among the gambling industry, there’s none within Australia’s corporate media: they all oppose a ban on broadcast gambling advertising — though they would be perfectly happy with a ban on social media advertising, thank you.”

None of this is about the efficacy of a full ban on gambling advertising, or the fact that it’s too complex to pull off. It’s not even about the gambling companies (some support a ban, some are indifferent). 

The media needs the money. 

We are, as an industry, collectively skint. As for funding expensive, time-consuming public service journalism? Forget it.

We’re not exactly rolling in it, but Crikey has never taken gambling money. It’s not loose change we’re rejecting, either. Gambling brands spend a lot. And mostly pay full price. 

We asked our ad sales team to do a rough, back-of-the-envelope calculation. Stay with us here: based on the available ad impressions, and imagining we sold 10% of them, (and factor in hiring a seller devoted to the job), it could conceivably shake out at a net margin contribution of around $300,000 – enough to really sink our teeth into some stories.

But we don’t go after that kind of money, we don’t take it when it’s offered and we’re not about to start. Why? 

For all the reasons that are driving the people who know what they’re talking about to push the government for a full ban on gambling advertising. We don’t want anything to do with the industry, no matter how many investigations its money would fund.

Instead, we want to talk about how to fund public interest journalism.

Even if they get to keep their pocket money this time round, this fight is yet another reminder that corporate media will continue to die a slow death. Squibbing on gambling advertising reform is just kicking the can down the road.

As dirty as the concept might be to some, the government needs to find the guts to intervene in some way by expanding the government funding model to all public interest journalism outlets. 

The media bargaining code was plainly not the answer to a long-term funding model for public interest journalism. It relied on trusting big tech to come to the table long term and trusting the big media outlets to divert the funds to actual journalism and preserving journalists’ jobs (take a look at our news jobs tracker to see how that’s panning out.) 

So while the big players are still bleating for their money, Shorten should check his notes — there’s very much a discussion about how broke (and broken) the media business model is, and how government can help fund crucial journalism. There are more than a few ideas currently being floated, including this latest concept from the Australia Institute, the thinking outlined here by Benjamin Clark, the Greens’ tech tax, not to mention our own publisher Private Media’s push to think beyond the inherently flawed media bargaining code (try throwing more money at the public broadcaster for starters). 

If the government ignores a growing backbench revolt and goes half-arsed on gambling reform, it deserves to be howled down. Simultaneously, it needs its feet held to the fire on funding journalism. Because things don’t get much more desperate than pocketing problem gamblers’ money to prop up a business model. Time for some new ideas. 

Anyone affected by problem gambling can get immediate assistance by calling the National Gambling Helpline on 1800 858 858 for free, professional and confidential support 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

Should media organisations take gambling ad money? Let us know your thoughts by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.

How the DAILY MAIL creates THOSE headlines, and Albanese’s West Wing weirdness

Plus how much cash did George Christensen raise for a Christian minister?

Free (speech) money

If you were wondering what former Nationals MP and One Nation Senate candidate George Christensen is up to these days, we’ve got you covered. Christensen, pointedly not speaking in his current capacity as a local councillor in Mackay, joined an all-star meeting of conservative minds this week to raise money for the Human Rights Law Alliance, an Australian Christian Lobby-associated group that has taken on the case of Dave Pellowe.

Pellowe is a Queensland preacher claiming he has been brought before the state’s human rights commission for quoting the bible in lieu of a Welcome to Country at a “Church and State” conference, a set of meetings organised with the Australian Christian Lobby that has featured the likes of Tony Abbott.

Tuesday night saw a telethon in support of his cause, with Christensen sitting alongside Pellowe, both proclaiming their love for freedom, free speech — about which Christensen knows a great deal — and Christian values as they cycled through a procession of friends, asking them what they thought about the crisis of free speech in Australia.

Whether listening to them proselytise about how the ’70s truly were a better time with Sky after dark’s Daisy Cousens, or muse on masculinity with Victorian Senator Ralph Babet, it was one hell of a ride we went on so you didn’t have to. One Nation’s Malcolm Roberts, NyunggaiWarren Mundine, Lyle Shelton and Avi Yemini also appeared in support.

While the event aimed to raise $1 million, it fell a little short, with the fundraiser sitting at $145,991 at the time of writing.

Which media companies does the PM give the most attention to?

Kicking off on Friday is News Corp’s 2024 National Bush Summit, where the keynote speaker is Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. He recently complained, on the ANU’s Democracy Sausage podcast in May, that some elements of the “right-wing media” act more like a cheer squad and transcription service for Opposition Leader Peter Dutton. He didn’t specify which publications, shows or broadcasters, but he was obviously referring to all the non-News Corp media in Australia, given how much time he makes for the Murdoch clan.

Since meeting with a collection of News Corp executives and editors in 2021, and again shortly after taking office in 2022, Albanese has turned up at The Australian’s 60th birthday party, will be addressing the Bush Summit for his third time, and attempted to “woo” the company into favouring the Indigenous Voice to Parliament in 2023 (with a quite notable lack of success).

And what of Nine, a company apparently so pro-Albanese that Dutton (clearly used to better treatment) keeps calling one of their top journalists an unpaid Albo speechwriter? A handful of (sometimes secret) meetings aside, Albanese has been less engaged with them since assuming office. Indeed, one of the possible reasons the last AFR summit was cancelled was the discomfit of some Labor MPs (though not specifically Albanese, who was not down to speak) with crossing the then picket line of striking Nine journos.

What have we missed? Who else in the media has had the prestige of a PM address? Let us know.

How the Daily Mail DECIDES what parts of its OUTRAGEOUS headlines to SCREAM

As any true fan of online tabloid media would know, the Daily Mail has a trademark quirk in its headlines: making certain words SCREAM by hitting caps lock (the headings are also known for being very long, but that’s a topic for another time).

We’ve certainly been curious about what the deal is. So we decided to find out by speaking to five experienced Mail staffers, including some who were formerly employed with the outlet in Australia and some who worked for it abroad.

At the Mail’s online publications — the daily newspaper in the UK is quite a separate beast and has little overlap with the digital editions — reporters are often assigned headlines prior to writing the story. Other times they suggest their own headlines, which are then generally tweaked by editors.

“I think the only hard and fast rule is that the words ‘very’ and ‘really’ are always capitalised,” one person said. “It’s definitely just whatever someone feels like.”

Another said: “I feel like I just tried to capitalise whatever was the most outrageous part of the story”.

The same source said words that often became capitalised would include raunchy ones like “penis”, and words appearing immediately after an impressive number: “Any word after a big number, like ‘37 dogs’ or ‘six wives’.”

A third person said the decision was based on the “feeling” of the sentence and described the process thusly: “If you were going to read it out loud, which one would you emphasise the most?”

All that being said, everyone we spoke to appeared to agree that they weren’t guided by any official rulebook for the headlines — “I don’t think there’s a method to the madness,” as one person put it.

Or, as another source phrased it: “I don’t think fine art can be explained”. 

Walk and talk

We’ve long been baffled by Labor’s social media choices, and a tipster got in contact to give us a new reason, with their candidate for the “worst West Wing episode ever“. Why Australia’s politicians love a Sorkinesque “walk and talk” (except stilted and with dreadful sound) will forever remain a mystery to us — who can forget Scott Morrison’s DEFCON 1 response to the 2018 scourge of strawberry tampering? Or this piece of Josh Frydenberg performance art?

Tourism Australia boss given new five-year term in midst of AFP investigation

Exclusive: Phillipa Harrison had her tenure extended at the same time her agency was being investigated by police. And Labor kept the reappointment quiet for nearly two months.

Tourism Australia Managing Director Phillipa Harrison has been reappointed for another five-year term at the helm of the embattled agency, Crikey can reveal. 

Harrison’s reappointment, which the government has been keeping quiet for nearly two months, happened as her agency was being investigated by the Australian Federal Police and just weeks after she was criticised by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) for failing to immediately report potential corrupt conduct within the agency.

The decision to reappoint Harrison was made by the Tourism Australia board, and Trade Minister Don Farrell told the prime minister the news on July 4, a document released to Crikey on Wednesday night under freedom of information (FOI) laws shows. 

“Tourism Australia’s board chair, Mr Michael Issenberg, has written to me informing me of the boards [sic] unanimous decision on the matter,” Farrell wrote in a letter to Anthony Albanese. 

The letter added Farrell “supported” the reappointment, noting Harrison was “well regarded in the industry” for her leadership during the coronavirus pandemic while Tourism Australia pivoted from attracting international tourists to promoting domestic travel.

Crikey applied for information about the decision on July 22, after reporting for months about a scandal inside the agency. By that date, the NACC had initiated and then scrapped a preliminary probe into Tourism Australia, after Crikey revealed three staffers, including a senior employee, had gone on private holidays using $137,441 of taxpayer money. Three people were fired and made to pay the money back.

On June 4 Harrison gave a statement to Senate estimates outlining the steps Tourism Australia’s management team had taken after the scandal including an audit going back to 2020 to make sure there were no other instances of wrongdoing and a “strengthening” of travel policy processes.

On June 13, the Australian Federal Police received a report about the travel scandal, which Crikey revealed the same day. The police force initiated a probe that was still ongoing by early August, meaning Farrell and the board were likely aware of the police investigation when Harrison was reappointed. 

Depending on how much Harrison told the board and the minister, those decision makers might also have been aware of a pair of letters from the NACC addressed to her, sent on June 5 and 6, in which Harrison’s agency was criticised for not reporting the travel scandal quickly enough to the corruption watchdog. Harrison was first made aware of the scandal in October last year, but didn’t report it to the NACC until January 24. The letters were made public in early August.

NACC commissioner Paul Brereton’s letters also said he was of the opinion the travel scandal “could involve corrupt conduct that is serious and systemic”. Furthermore, he asked Harrison to correct the Senate record after she falsely implied she had been told by the NACC she would be “unable” to answer questions about the scandal in front of estimates.

Farrell’s office prepared a media statement to coincide with the release of the FOI document, which was provided to Crikey alongside the rest of the material.

“As [pandemic] recovery continues, Tourism Australia under Ms Harrison’s stewardship, is continuing to help drive international demand including through the successful ‘Come and Say G’day’ campaign. The campaign has had almost 2.5 billion views worldwide helping to convert interest into international visitor bookings,” Farrell said in the statement. 

“Under Ms Harrison’s ongoing leadership, I am confident Tourism Australia will continue to do what they do best, encouraging more international visitors to experience our abundant natural beauty, wonderful experiences and world-class food and wine.”

While the reappointment was made by the Tourism Australia board — a fact government officials have been careful to stress in conversations with Crikey — the Tourism Australia Act 2004 says that “the managing director holds office on the terms and conditions (if any) in relation to matters not covered by this act that are determined by the board with the minister’s written approval”.

Harrison began her tenure as managing director in 2019, and her contract was due to expire on September 11. According to the 2022-23 annual report, she earned a total of $536,792 that financial year. 

It’s not the first time the tenure of a Tourism Australia managing director has made headlines: Scott Morrison’s time as the inaugural head of Tourism Australia from 2004 to 2006 was the source of endless speculation during his first three years as prime minister, beginning in 2018. 

The Age state political editor Annika Smethurst revealed in her 2021 book The Accidental Prime Minister Morrison had lost the confidence of then tourism minister Fran Bailey over his failure to properly consult her over a series of controversial ad campaigns, leading to his sacking.

Zali Steggall stands by telling Dutton to ‘stop being racist’, yet is no Green on Gaza

Independent MP Zali Steggall tells Crikey she wasn’t planning to call the opposition racist but did so after heckling.

The Warringah MP has been praised for calling out the Coalition’s racism. But she’s far from a “Green in Gucci” when it comes to Gaza.

“For too long, we’ve been bullied into not calling out divisive and racist policy out of fear,” Zali Steggall tells me, a week after she demanded Peter Dutton “stop being racist” during a debate over his calls for a ban on Palestinians refugees fleeing Gaza. Just like during the Voice referendum, Labor, while critical of the opposition leader, has yet again been dancing around the term this week, calling him everything from “divisive” to “nasty”. 

“The unwillingness to call a spade a spade allows it to continue to fester,” Steggall says. “I think that is incredibly dangerous.”

Steggall, a former barrister, doesn’t think she should’ve had to withdraw her original comment, though she did so when asked to “assist the House”. She’s since had a conversation with the speaker, pointing out that “racist” is not a slur but an ordinary term with a clear definition.

Steggall may or may not be the original “teal” (that title could also go to Kerryn Phelps), but she knocked off Tony Abbott in 2019 and was the first of this new wave to run on the blue-green colour that has since come to define them, meaning she is likely the reason we now use the term “teals”.

She is also the first among them to be reelected, growing her already impressive margin in 2022, making her formerly safe Liberal seat a safe independent seat.

Perhaps this is what gives Steggall the confidence she displayed last Thursday when she demanded Dutton “stop being racist”. The two-term teal has since doubled down, telling outlets she stands by the label with regards to the proposed Palestine visa ban, prompting threats of legal action from the opposition leader and fierce condemnation from conservative media, which is, as per the playbook, more concerned about accusations of racism than racism itself.

Steggall, who at the time of her comment had been trying to share the story of a Palestinian man who came to Warringah to learn surf lifesaving, wasn’t planning to call Dutton racist — though that was clearly the inference of her speech. It was the opposition’s ongoing heckling that prompted her rebuke.

“The allegations they were throwing at me were just plain racist,” says Steggall, via Zoom, referring to Coalition jibes that she was supporting rapists and terrorists. She has since suggested their entire position is “inherently racist”, further incensing the opposition.

“Why is it okay to accuse other politicians of antisemitism but not okay to draw the conclusion of racism?” she asks, noting that the Coalition has been allowed to describe the Greens as antisemitic “with impunity”.

Steggall is quick to clarify that she doesn’t agree with the Greens, claiming they are “polarising this issue as well”. The Coalition has nevertheless spent much of the week painting her as essentially a party member — a not unfamiliar tactic. Dutton has labelled her a “zealot”, while Liberal Senator Hollie Hughes said the teals were simply “Greens in a Gucci jacket”. Nationals Senator Bridget McKenzie clearly felt she had struck gold when she noticed teal was next to green on the colour wheel — as if this wasn’t a large part of why the climate-focused small-l liberals had chosen it.

It is, of course, ludicrous to suggest Steggall is akin to a Green on Gaza. Though she is critical of Labor for failing to call “a spade a spade” when it comes to racism, she and the teals have generally backed the government on its mild calls for a ceasefire, focusing mostly on the need for “social cohesion” (Kylea Tink and Sophie Scamps have been slightly to the left, Allegra Spender and Zoe Daniel further to the right). 

Steggall’s most recent statement on the matter agreed with Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong, accusing the Greens and the Coalition of engaging in “wedge politics” for political gain.

I ask Steggall whether she believes the government has been too willing to pander to the Coalition on this, and whether it ought to take a stronger stand to protect the lives of people in Gaza. The independent MP offers up a long and meandering answer, focused mostly on how complex the conflict is and the fact Australia doesn’t carry much weight in it, expressing concern about both antisemitism and Islamophobia. It’s a far cry from the confidence she displays in calling out the Coalition’s visa stance.

That said, Steggall isn’t particularly bothered by the criticism currently coming from the Coalition — mostly via “Sky News and 2GB”, she notes. Nor does she place much stock in AFR reports of a “rift” amid the North Shore teals, with Steggall and Tink putting forward differing proposals than Scamps in the AEC’s electorate review.

“That’s Phil Coorey doing his usual mud-slinging,” Steggall says, adding that she has asked the AFR political editor to clarify his stories. “There is no rift. I think all this shows is we’re all independent and we’re not told by anybody as to what line or what view to take on an issue, including the boundary redistributions.” 

Other sources agree, labelling the reports “a storm in a teacup” over a minor difference of opinion. Certainly the NSW teals have been a united front in recent days, holding a joint press conference to call out the opposition’s aggressive behaviour, which the speaker says only increases when crossbenchers speak.

There’s no doubt this was part of what caused Steggall to snap last week. Coalition MPs, she says, “have this pathological need to interrupt, speak over you and try to bully you out of the debate.” And it’s only gotten uglier as the crossbench has grown.

“There’s a frustration in the opposition that they are not the only voice in town,” Steggall surmises. “They don’t welcome varied debate or different views, for the Parliament to be a place of debate that reflects Australian society.”

Steggall makes the point that words matter. Teals are not “hard Greens,” as much as Sky News might like them to be. And the Dutton-led opposition is continuing to be “racist”, whether or not the Albanese government is willing to say it.

Liberals ask federal bigwigs to weigh in on NSW election disaster

Exclusive: Crikey was leaked an email sent Wednesday morning by Liberal Party assistant federal director Josh Manuatu — a name that political news tragics may remember from another messy saga.

The Liberal Party has begun accepting submissions to an internal review into the NSW division’s local elections mess — and the point person in the federal office is none other than Josh Manuatu. 

Political news tragics might remember Manuatu from another messy affair: the 2019 incident where fake travel figures from the City of Sydney council made their way into a media report. At the time, Manuatu was a staffer for then energy minister Angus Taylor and was identified in an article by The Australian as being “­involved in gathering the information that was then handed to The Daily Telegraph newspaper”. 

Manuatu kept his job and was later made director of the Canberra Liberals. The documents saga was probed by NSW Police and then referred to the Australian Federal Police, but the feds never proceeded to investigate, deeming the risk to Sydney Lord Mayor Clover Moore and others “low”. Neither Manuatu nor anyone else was ever interviewed by the AFP over the saga, the force told Senate Estimates in 2020. Crikey is not suggesting any wrongdoing by Manuatu. 

Crikey was leaked an email sent Wednesday morning by Manuatu — now the party’s assistant federal director — to members of the Liberal federal executive committee, inviting them to make submissions about the NSW division’s “preparedness for the next federal election”. The email notes the review, by Brian Loughnane, was commissioned by the federal leader — i.e. Peter Dutton — and the party’s federal president, John Olsen. 

As Crikey previously reported, Loughnane’s review is due by September 2. Liberal sources have said a likely outcome of the review could be a Canberra takeover of the campaign for federal seats in NSW.

Manuatu and Dutton’s office were contacted for comment.

Mehreen Faruqi writes to communications minister over ABC board’s lack of diversity

Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi has taken aim at the makeup of the ABC board in a letter, seen by Crikey, to Communications Minister Michelle Rowland.

Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi has taken aim at the lack of diversity on the ABC’s board in a letter, seen by Crikey, to Communications Minister Michelle Rowland. 

On August 15, Faruqi wrote to Rowland and called the “lack of diversity on the ABC board … unacceptable”. 

“The ABC board is completely and embarrassingly bereft of diversity,” Faruqi wrote.

“It has no doubt contributed to the poor treatment of high profile First Nations journalist Stan Grant and journalists of colour like Antoinette Lattouf.

“It also likely contributes to a failure to recognise and respond to concerns from the public and ABC staff that the ABC’s coverage of the genocide in Gaza has been pro-Israel.” 

Rowland’s office confirmed to Crikey it had received the letter on August 15 and had not yet replied.

Faruqi grilled ABC managing director David Anderson at Senate estimates in late May over diversity on the board, with Anderson confirming, to his knowledge, that the board had no First Nations peoples on it, no people of colour, no members of the LGBTQIA+ community, and no people living with disability. 

Anderson admitted that the board wasn’t representative of the Australian community “but the board appointments are made by government”.

In a response to a question on notice as to whether the government would commit to ensuring the ABC board was diverse, also asked in May, Rowland said that the minister’s recommendations to the governor-general in respect of ABC board appointments were made with “due regard to gender, diversity and geographic balance of the board, in the interests of the ABC reflecting the cultural diversity of the Australian community,” and were informed by a shortlist given by the nominations panel at the ABC. 

Should ABC leadership better reflect the Australian community? Let us know your thoughts by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.

‘Swiss cheese’ regulation: 21 crossbenchers call for a full gambling advertising ban

MP for Curtin Kate Chaney told Crikey there were 'people on both sides of the House who want to ban gambling ads but can't speak up'.

Twenty-one crossbenchers have signed a letter to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese calling for a legislated “blanket ban on advertisements for online gambling”, arguing that “the reform package currently being discussed with stakeholders seems designed to prioritise broadcast media sustainability over public health concerns”.

Signatories include the teal independents, the Greens, Senator David Pocock, Senator Jacqui Lambie, former Labor senator Fatima Payman, Green-turned-independent Lidia Thorpe, Indi MP Helen Haines, independent for Clark Andrew Wilkie, Centre Alliance MP Rebekha Sharkie and Liberal MP for Bass Bridget Archer, with Archer the only current major party MP represented on the list.

Independent MP for Curtin Kate Chaney — who sat on the committee lead by late Labor MP Peta Murphy, which called for a blanket ban — told Crikey there were “people on both sides of the House who want to ban gambling ads but can’t speak up”.

Labor MPs Maria Vamvakinou and Louise Miller-Frost were also on Murphy’s committee, and although they have not signed the letter, they, along with Mike Freelander and Labor’s Victorian State Gaming Minister Melissa Horne, have both called for a ban.

Chaney said that the government’s proposal, on which she and other crossbenchers were briefed yesterday, was “more Swiss cheese regulation” of the gambling industry, full of holes and exemptions. She said it only addressed one of the 31 proposals put forward by Murphy’s committee.

“It was clear while we were being briefed that it was something on the other side of the ledger, other than public health, deciding these reforms,” she said. “And that thing on the other side of the ledger was commercial broadcasters’ sustainability.”

Chaney said the evidence presented to the committee overwhelmingly proved that partial bans on gambling ads don’t work.

“I asked [during the briefing] whether there was any new evidence, and I was told ‘oh well young people are always online now’, so banning it online was enough,” she said.

Chaney said there had been talk of a conscience vote on the matter “though not, as far as I know, by the people who actually make these decisions”.

“I imagine if individual MPs were to ask what their electorates actually wanted in this space, we’d have very different outcomes,” she said.

Anyone affected by problem gambling can get immediate assistance by calling the National Gambling Helpline on 1800 858 858 for free, professional and confidential support 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

Should Labor allow its MPs a conscience vote on a gambling ad ban? Let us know your thoughts by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.

Public housing residents sue Western Australia

A class action lawsuit has been lodged against the Housing Authority and the state of Western Australia on behalf of public housing residents, and 'presidential candidate' Robert F. Kennedy Jr is expected to drop out of the race by the end of this week.

PUBLIC HOUSING CLASS ACTION

A class action lawsuit has been lodged against the Housing Authority and the state of Western Australia on behalf of public housing residents in WA’s remote Indigenous communities, the ABC reports. Residents of up to 3,000 dwellings are accusing the state government of allowing public houses to fall into an unlivable condition, with some saying that repair or alternative housing has not been provided in some cases for more than two years.

Sixty-five-year-old Anne Lenard’s roof was ripped off by a storm in 2022 and she has been forced to live in the kitchen of a local “homemaker building”. “A homemaker building is where we cook tucker if there is a party for our children … it’s supposed to be [a community building], not a place where you’re sleeping,” she told ABC’s 7.30. “I sleep in the kitchen and my little girl has the storeroom.”

A similar class action in the Northern Territory late last year found that the government there was liable for distress caused by a failure to repair public housing.

Meanwhile in the commercial housing market, the AAP reports it’s not just boomers benefitting from the housing boom, with Gen X and older millennials among those making record profits from selling properties. The median profit for a sold house is now $395,000 across the combined capitals, according to property website Domain, with 96% of all properties now turning a profit.

In response to the housing crisis, independent Senator Fatima Payman is going after negative gearing, according to The West Australian. Payman, who never publicly criticised the practice before joining the crossbench, told the Senate yesterday that negative gearing is the “tax system’s way of handing out massive freebies to people who are already doing pretty well”.

“Meanwhile, young Australians are stuck renting, watching house prices skyrocket, wondering if they’ll ever be able to afford their own home.” The West points out that Payman recently purchased her own investment property, though she says she has no plans to negatively gear the one-bedroom unit.

RFK OUT OF THE RACE

In news that will shock almost no-one, “presidential candidate” Robert F. Kennedy Jr is expected to drop out of the race by the end of this week, CNN reports. The nephew of JFK made headlines earlier this month when, in a bizarre attempt to appear relatable, he admitted to picking up a recently run-over bear off the road to eat while on a falconing trip before dumping it in New York’s Central Park after a luxury steakhouse dinner… y’know, just regular guy stuff.

It comes as Kennedy’s running mate Nicole Shanahan told a podcast on Tuesday that the pair were considering abandoning their campaign in order to help the election of Donald Trump, The Guardian reports. The US ABC says sources have claimed the deal is yet to be finalised, but that RFK is interested in doing so quickly to blunt the momentum of the Democrats following the rise of Kamala Harris.

NBC is reporting that Trump is “working hard” to secure the endorsement of RFK, but JD Vance warned that the former Democrat shouldn’t expect a cabinet position in exchange for his endorsement: “I think you shouldn’t ever trade important jobs in the government for an endorsement. Whether it’s illegal or not, it’s certainly unethical.”

Meanwhile, the Democratic National Convention is in full swing, with Tim Walz set to formally accept the party’s vice presidential nomination in a speech tonight, Chicago time. Also on the bill at the DNC are former president Bill Clinton, former House speaker Nancy Pelosi, and House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries. At the time of writing, The Guardian reports Stevie Wonder is currently sound-checking “Higher Ground” (in reference to Michelle Obama?), confirming what everyone already knew re: all the coolest musicians not being Republicans…

ON A LIGHTER NOTE…

Journalism is facing a lot of threats these days, with declining ad revenues, lagging print sales, malevolent tech giants and vapid social media sludge all vying to undermine the great work done by reporters and investigators across the world.

At times like these, it’s important to take stock of what we truly value: the power held to account, the brave stories of human resilience and fear overcome, the terrifying and tragic tales that inspire true belief and change.

Anyway, here are 276 photos of baby zoo animals. Oh look, a pangolin!

Say What?

An idiot — a king without claim — will seize a throne, and there will be war in the land.

Ancient Babylonian tablet

A set of four 4,000-year-old cuneiform tablets have finally been deciphered at the British Museum — it turns out they detail more than 60 omens predicted by ancient astronomers in Babylon, including: “Famine. Plague. Drought. Assassinations. War.” This one is particularly ominous…

CRIKEY RECAP

As Biden heads to the big convention in the sky, Harris reaffirms that ‘nothing ever happens’

GUY RUNDLE

So farewell then, Joe Biden, signing off from politics at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. Scranton Joe’s speech was nothing spectacular and the 46th president was low on energy. There were a couple of stumbles and tangles, but nothing like the big fade-on he suffered during his first and only 2024 debate with The Donald.

His speech — a testament to his half-century career as a right-wing Democrat who ended up on the centre-left by forces of events, a man who did much good and fought for unions and women’s safety, who got the US out of Afghanistan while being a shameless advocate of the Delaware insurance, credit card, and chemical industry complexes — was rapturously received. Chiefly because its low energy confirmed to everyone there that the party was right to shove him out the window and move on to Kamala: he rallied at points, but had he managed to give a barn-burner, there would have been more than a touch of buyer’s remorse over the selection of Harris.

A federal takeover of the NSW Liberals would spell Victoria-like disaster for the state

BERNARD KEANE

This lurching from the incompetent to the shambolic has right-wingers correctly sharpening their knives for [Don] Harwin: Tony Abbott — whose political genius extends to winning the prime ministership in a landslide, getting sacked by his own MPs after less than two years, and losing his own once-safe seat — has demanded Harwin follow state director Richard Shields out the door, and wants a federal takeover of the NSW division. News Corp is right behind him, with veteran Coalition loyalist Dennis Shanahan also demanding a federal takeover, failing tabloid The Daily Telegraph calling for Harwin’s head, and The Australian rushing to defend Shields.

The narrative from the right — Peta Credlin has pushed it — is that the NSW division has been a basket case that cost Tony Abbott victory in 2010 (when the only thing that got Abbott close enough to contemplate offering his “arse” for the prime ministership was Kevin Rudd’s demolition job on the Gillard campaign) and helped cause the defeat of Scott Morrison in 2022. “We already know the review of the 2022 election found that the NSW branch ‘was not in an acceptable position to contest the election in some seats’,” Shanahan offered in The Australian, going on to quote extensively from the 2022 election review by [Brian] Loughnane and Jane Hume (another political genius) on the shortcomings of the NSW branch.

Reader reply: Debate over the age of criminal responsibility overlooks the true meaning of intervention

MAIRE MANNIK

There is a lot of debate about raising the age of criminal responsibility from 10 to 14, and Michael Bradley’s article on the topic goes down the common path of confusing intervention with custodial sentences. Indeed locking up children as young as 10 should be avoided, and except in very rare cases, it is. But criminal responsibility means something else; it allows for intervention, and in the case of youth crime, helps to prevent re-offending.

Managing young offenders is an ethical minefield, and the South Australian system seems to make an effort to be humane with the goal of prevention rather than punishment. I worked in crime statistics for 23 years and monitored the implementation of this approach — on the whole it does seem to be working.

In South Australia, intervention initially involves a police caution. The child and their family members have the offence dealt with by a trained police sergeant, who explains to the young offender why what they did was wrong and why it would be a very bad idea for it to happen again.

READ ALL ABOUT IT

Ukraine targets Moscow in ‘one of largest ever’ drone attacks (Al Jazeera)

THE COMMENTARIAT

Behind the political arguments, there’s been some rare cooperation in Parliament this week — David Speers (ABC): You wouldn’t know it watching question time, but there are signs this week of Parliament functioning as a parliament should. For all the arguments and name-calling when the cameras are rolling, behind the scenes there’s been some actual negotiation and cooperation. On Monday legislation was passed to send in administrators to clean up the CFMEU. Yesterday a bill was passed to crack down on the sharing of deepfake pornography…

And then there are the two big structural reforms — to aged care and the NDIS — both aimed at putting the budget on a “more sustainable footing” and preventing costs continuing to balloon. Both effectively involve more user pays.

Bipartisanship is rare. Bipartisanship on slugging some voters more is even rarer. A scare campaign about forcing the elderly to pay more would be easy to run. It would also be devastating politically. If, as expected, an agreement is struck, it will show both sides accept the need for reform, and both sides accept it can only be done with a partisan truce.