[ad_1]
Inland Rail review reveals ‘significant concerns’
Elias Visontay
An independent review into the Inland Rail project has revealed “significant concerns” regarding governance and delivery of the multibillion-dollar rail line.
On Monday transport minister Catherine King and finance minister Katy Gallagher announced the review conducted by former Sydney Water chief executive Dr Kerry Schott to re-examine the planning, governance and delivery of Australian Rail Track Corporation’s project had been provided to the government.
In a statement, King and Gallagher said:
It reveals significant concerns about the governance and delivery of Inland Rail. The Government intends to release Dr Schott’s report and the Government’s response to its recommendations as soon as it has been fully considered.
The update was made in a press release announcing the appointment of Peter Duncan as the new chair of the ARTC board and Collette Burke as non-executive director of the board on three-year terms. Duncan, the current chair of WaterNSW, replaces Warren Truss, who stepped down as chair in November.
The Inland Rail project has garnered criticism since its construction began. Critics of the project, including the NSW Farmers Association, said they had been left feeling frustrated and “ignored” by the previous government’s failure to heed the views of regional communities.
Calls for an independent review into the project’s business case were rejected by the Morrison government on the grounds that a reassessment was “not an appropriate use of taxpayer dollars” despite the scheme’s major cost blowout.
A Senate report released in August called on the government to update the 2015 business case, which originally estimated the cost at $4.7bn. The project is now budgeted at $14.5bn, with costs estimated to exceed $20bn.
Read more about the Inland Rail review in this piece from Khaled Al Khawaldeh:
Key events
Filters BETA
The international visitors keep on coming:
Balloons not the principal means for spying on Australia, Asio says
Daniel Hurst
At the estimates committee hearing, Liberal senator Alex Antic asks the Asio boss about “the incursion of the CCP spy ballon over the United States”. Antic wants to know whether Asio is aware of any attempted incursions, threats of incursions or actual incursions over Australia.
Mike Burgess, the head of Asio, replies drily:
I don’t comment on operational matters. Of course I’m aware of the reporting around balloons and balloons allegedly being used for spying.
In my experience that is not the principal means by which people are spying on this country.
Antic asks about any other unknown devices such as UAPs (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena):
I’m not aware of any of those, no.
Lorena Allam
[Continued from previous post]
But a dissenting report from the five Coalition members of the committee said they could not “in good conscience” support the changes. They consider it essential for the government to equally fund the ‘yes’ and’ ‘no’ campaigns, in the interests of informed debate.
Coalition MP James Stevens said:
Any kind of trickery or rigging the system and effectively trying to advantage one side of a debate over the other will only increase scepticism amongst the people of this country and will only contribute to the defeat of whatever proposition is put to them.
And it will be difficult to change the constitution anytime we try no matter what the proposition is, and why you would want to add and be saddled with the additional challenge of having made a legislative change that unwinds the precedent of supporting proper debate on changing our constitution in this nation is absolutely mystifying to those of us in the coalition.
We urge the government to dramatically reconsider the message it will send and the damage it would inflict on attempts to change the constitution by saying we don’t want to have a properly resourced argument for and against that change.
Independent MP Kate Chaney said she supported the “somewhat vague” recommendation that impartial information should be made available but had concerns about ‘racist misinformation’:
It’s essential that we do a better job of ensuring truth in political advertising. This is broader than the proposed voice referendum but concerns about racist misinformation in this context are real and sharpens the focus on truth in advertising because of the potential damage that could be done.
Chaney recommended an independent panel to fact check information disseminated in the referendum campaign.
Chaney said there should be greater transparency about campaign funding and recommended the immediate disclosure of any donation above $1000.
For such an important referendum for the future of the country, truth and transparency are vital, and I urge the government to consider improvements to this end in the implementation of the legislation.”
Lorena Allam
A parliamentary inquiry into the government’s plans to amend the referendum machinery act – which sets out the rules about the upcoming vote on an Indigenous voice to parliament – has tabled its report supporting the government’s changes.
The changes under consideration by the joint standing committee on electoral matters include declining to provide public funding for either the yes or no side and abolishing the printing of official pamphlets outlining the campaign arguments.
The Albanese government has since decided it will produce the pamphlets.
The committee welcomed those plans. Its report said voters need to have access to “clear, factual and impartial” information. It was broadly in favour of government’s decision not to fund either the ‘yes’ or ‘no’ campaigns.
Labor chair of the committee, Kate Thwaites said:
The committee recommends the government considers how best to can ensure all Australians are provided clear, factual, and impartial information as part of the referendum … The government has announced that part of providing this information will be a yes no pamphlet, and that this will be coupled with broader efforts at providing the information Australians will need to feel assured they have been informed before they go to the polls. With these considerations and recommended recommendations in mind. That committee supports the passage of the bill.”
Jonathan Barrett
After a prolonged splurge on electronics and gadgets, Australians are starting to temper their spending.
Electronics and whitegoods retailer JB Hi-Fi has reported moderating sales growth in January, and flagged an “uncertain period” ahead after years of pandemic-fuelled purchases, according to its half year results released on Monday.
The retailer, which also owns consumer electronics chain The Good Guys, became the darling stock of the pandemic after locked-down customers rushed to buy electronics, gadgets and entertainment systems. Many Australians also had spare money for whitegoods after travel plans were cancelled.
The company’s net profit for the six-month period to December was up 14.6% to $329.9m, compared to the same period in 2021. JB Hi-Fi also raised its dividend.
Total sales at JB Hi-Fi’s Australian electronics and whitegoods stores were running about one-third higher than before the Covid-19 pandemic, according to its financial results.
But sales growth slowed in January in what could be the start of a spending pullback prompted by a series of rises in the official cash rate, pressuring mortgage holders.
The Reserve Bank of Australia has warned that “strong domestic demand” has been stoking inflationary pressures, with further increases in interest rates likely needed over the months ahead to quash those pressures.
Daniel Hurst
Espionage has supplanted terrorism, Asio chief says
The head of intelligence agency Asio is up at Senate estimates now. The director general, Mike Burgess, used his opening statement to say the current security environment is “complex, challenging and changing”.
He reiterates Asio’s position, expressed several times that espionage and foreign interference has “supplanted terrorism as our principal security concern”.
Australia is the target of sophisticated and persistent espionage and foreign interference activities from a range of hostile foreign intelligence services. These activities are an attack on our way of life.
Burgess reminds the committee that he decided late last year to lower Australia’s terrorism threat level from probable to possible. But he adds a cautionary note:
Possible does not mean negligible, however … Threats to life will always be a priority for Asio.
Burgess says Asio will seek to stay ahead of those threats.
Teal MPs to hold press conference shortly
The crossbench is pretty happy with Labor fulfilling its election promise to provide a pathway to permanency for temporary protection and safe haven enterprise visa holders (the refugees who arrived before operation sovereign borders in 2014)
Independent MPs Kylea Tink, Allegra Spender, Monique Ryan, Kate Chaney and Zoe Daniel will be holding a press conference on it very soon.
Referendum Amendment Bill should be passed with amendments, committee says
This report has just dropped:
The parliament’s Electoral Matters Committee has recommended that the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Amendment Bill 2022 be passed, if amendments are made to strengthen enfranchisement and participation in the referendum, particularly of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, and clear, factual and impartial information is made accessible to all voters.
Tabling the report today the committee chair, Kate Thwaites MP, said the inquiry and the legislation were focused on technical aspects of conducting a referendum.
‘Above all, the legislation intends to modernise the referendum process and bring it into line with how recent federal elections have been conducted,’ Thwaites said.
The committee recommended that the legislation be passed, but also that:
-
The government consider any amendments to support increased enrolment and participation in the referendum, particularly of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, including in remote communities
-
Clear, factual and impartial information is provided in appropriate formats for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voters, and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds
And in case you missed it:
Government should pay for NDIS carers’ annual and sick leave, union says
The Australian Services Union wants the government to pay for annual leave and sick leave for all NDIS casuals and contractors. Is that something Bill Shorten is considering?
Shorten told the ABC:
I think there’s a legitimate general issue in terms of how we remunerate people who work in the care economy, in the disability sector. For example, in terms of the specifics, we don’t have any specific arrangement that we have in mind. We were able to last July, almost straight after the election, pass on the awarding process which did see several percent of improvement in workers’ wages. The Services Union and other unions in the disability sector are saying to me, Bill, if we want the best possible workforce, we need to make sure we factor in their ability to get trained by their employers.
We need to factor in also that in this sector, a lot of disability carers won’t work for one employer their whole 15 years. The long service leave is a sort of 1970s, 1980s, 1960s proposition that you have a job to live for one employer and the care economy you move between employers, you might be a contractor you might be on one of the internet platforms.
That means that long service leaves just becomes impossible to get. So they’re saying these are important issues which go to a worker’s remuneration so we’re going to have the discussion with them, with employers, with people with disability we don’t have a specific plan specific time I’m but I think it’s wrong of the government of the day and indeed, the broader community just to think that these disability carers who really do very tough work, important work, therapeutic work, when they shouldn’t be subsidising our nation’s desire to care for some of the most vulnerable people. We should be talking about what works.
Unlimited carbon offsets ‘cheap tickets to keep polluting’, conservationist says
The Australian Conservation Foundation’s Gavan McFadzean is pretty happy the independent senator David Pocock raised concerns about unlimited carbon offsets when it comes to the safeguard’s mechanism on ABC radio this morning.
McFadzean said the work Labor has done to restore Australia’s international reputation on climate could be “unraveled” by the inclusion of unlimited offsets:
For wealthy coal and gas companies, unlimited offsets are like cheap tickets to keep polluting business as usual.
We urge the government to revise its design so the scheme can actually become an effective tool to cut emissions from Australia’s major polluters – we can’t offset our way to net zero.
Offsets should only be used as an absolute last resort, should not be available for coal and gas companies, should only be accessed once a company can prove it is genuinely making efforts to reduce carbon, and should phase down as a share of the Safeguard Mechanism over time. Plus Australia’s carbon offsets industry needs greater scrutiny and regulation.
How safe are MPs’ phones from hackers, senator asks in estimates
Katharine Murphy
Good morning. I’ve been keeping an ear on the finance committee of Senate estimates for the last 30 minutes or so.
The Liberal senator James McGrath has just asked officials in the Department of Parliamentary Services whether or not the mobile devices allocated to MPs are safe. He means safe from hacking.
The official at the table says there are “constant” attempts to breach parliament house networks and “make targeted attacks against us”. McGrath wants a number. How many such attacks in recent months?
The official declines to say in “an open forum” but says he’ll take the question on notice.
Flood-hit Lismore awaits buybacks
It’s been almost a year since Lismore and surrounding regions were hit by devastating floods. AAP reports that residents are still waiting for information on the buyback programs:
Almost a year on from the deadly Lismore floods, the community is still waiting for a single at-risk home to be acquired through a government repair package.
Record-breaking flooding devastated the NSW northern rivers in February and March last year, killing five people and destroying 4,000 homes.
The unprecedented devastation led to a $520m commitment from the state and federal governments to buy homes and land from people living in the most flood-prone parts of the region.
The northern rivers resilient homes fund, with a total budget of $800m, also promised flood victims the opportunity to retrofit, repair, or raise their homes to prevent future flood impact.
Close to four months on from the government announcement, locals continue to wait for land buybacks or other remediation packages to be handed out.
When asked how many home and land buybacks, retrofitting and home raising packages had been offered, a spokesperson for the Northern Rivers Reconstruction Corporation told AAP it expected to send offers for buybacks “in early 2023”.
The assessments of more than 6,000 registrations were in the “early phase”, she said.
It is anticipated several home owner assessments, valuations and letters of offer for voluntary buy backs under the Resilient Homes Program will be completed in early-2023, with progress updates to be provided to community.
The corporation’s customer outreach and case management pilot launched in December and voluntary buybacks in the areas most at risk of renewed flooding were being prioritised. The spokesperson said:
This early phase involves more than 130 home owners, with the program to ramp up across the region this month.
More than 6,500 people have registered for the suite of offers including buybacks, repair, retrofitting, home raising or knockdown and rebuilds.
A further 300 landowners have registered their interest in the $100m resilient land program, where the NSW government will relocate residents to new land, safe from flood impact.
Land assessments were under way, the spokesperson said, and a shortlist of landholdings was expected by March.
The corporation had held almost 50 meetings with the community and stakeholders over the past three month, she said.
Last month protesters rallied outside the corporation’s headquarters in Lismor, holding placards saying “We need answers” and “Living in Limbo – No Really Real Communication”.
The House is about to sit at 10am.
The Senate is tied up with estimates business, so in terms of parliament movements, it is all about the House this week. But that doesn’t meant that Senate negotiations are not still going on – we just won’t see the result (if any) of those until parliament next sits in March.
Inland Rail review reveals ‘significant concerns’
Elias Visontay
An independent review into the Inland Rail project has revealed “significant concerns” regarding governance and delivery of the multibillion-dollar rail line.
On Monday transport minister Catherine King and finance minister Katy Gallagher announced the review conducted by former Sydney Water chief executive Dr Kerry Schott to re-examine the planning, governance and delivery of Australian Rail Track Corporation’s project had been provided to the government.
In a statement, King and Gallagher said:
It reveals significant concerns about the governance and delivery of Inland Rail. The Government intends to release Dr Schott’s report and the Government’s response to its recommendations as soon as it has been fully considered.
The update was made in a press release announcing the appointment of Peter Duncan as the new chair of the ARTC board and Collette Burke as non-executive director of the board on three-year terms. Duncan, the current chair of WaterNSW, replaces Warren Truss, who stepped down as chair in November.
The Inland Rail project has garnered criticism since its construction began. Critics of the project, including the NSW Farmers Association, said they had been left feeling frustrated and “ignored” by the previous government’s failure to heed the views of regional communities.
Calls for an independent review into the project’s business case were rejected by the Morrison government on the grounds that a reassessment was “not an appropriate use of taxpayer dollars” despite the scheme’s major cost blowout.
A Senate report released in August called on the government to update the 2015 business case, which originally estimated the cost at $4.7bn. The project is now budgeted at $14.5bn, with costs estimated to exceed $20bn.
Read more about the Inland Rail review in this piece from Khaled Al Khawaldeh:
Pocock calls safeguard mechanism ‘a massive, complicated beast’
Independent ACT senator David Pocock is a key vote for the government to get its safeguard mechanism though the Senate. Pocock told ABC radio RN Breakfast he was working through his issues carefully:
This is a massive, complicated beast, the safeguard mechanism. I’ve been having some really constructive discussions with the government. I’ll continue to do that in good faith.
But I’ve also been speaking to industry climate groups or the interested parties.
I’m running a roundtable next week, and then that the Senate inquiry process takes place after that.
So I’ll keep engaging and form a position. I do have a number of concerns, but I’m really wanting to engage and find solutions to them.
What are those concerns?
I think the biggest concern is that the government is opening the door to our biggest emitters, paying to pollute rather than becoming more efficient and decarbonising.
As it stands, we’re the only other jurisdiction in the world that allows full open access to offset emissions [apart from] Kazakhstan.
So if it were to pass as it stands, it would be Australia and Kazakhstan that allow 100% of emissions to be offset using carbon credits.
We know that there are concerns around the integrity of some of the carbon methodologies.
So for me, integrity has to be at the heart of this policy, we have to be certain that this will drive the sorts of changes that we desperately need.
Peter Hannam
Lowe to front MPs twice this week
Reserve Bank governor Philip Lowe will front MPs twice this week, starting with Wednesday morning’s estimates hearing followed by an economics committee hearing on Friday.
You have to assume a similar line of questions at both, namely what’s behind Lowe’s more hawkish tone for “further rate rises” to come, beyond last Tuesday’s rate rise – the ninth in a row.
Before last Tuesday’s rate rise, markets were expecting the RBA to nudge the cash rate to about 3.6%. As of the end of last week, investors are now much more pessimistic, tipping a peak rate of above 4.1%.
Investors continue to nudge higher their view of how high the ‘terminal’ RBA cash rate will go. At 4.1%, that would implies three more 25bp increases from 3.35% now. That’s more than most economists and much higher than about 3.6% pre last Tuesday’s rise (and hawkish comments). pic.twitter.com/urkozut9qI
— @phannam@mastodon.green (@p_hannam) February 12, 2023
Lowe’s appearance before bankers last Thursday at a lunch hosted by (the rather little known bank) Barrenjoey – as reported by the AFR – will also get scrutiny.
There’s speculation that the discussion resulted in bond yields widening (and prices falling) after the meeting but proving causation rather than correlation will be tricky.
Still, Lowe’s absence otherwise in the public arena – unlike previous starts to the year – will get some attention.
Anyway, if you’d like to hear more about what’s going on with rates and the economy more generally, we have this handy podcast out this very morning:
‘They’ve opened the gate,’ Andrews says of visa changes
Shadow home affairs minister Karen Andrews is doing the most to make the TPV changes a Very Big Issue. Andrews does not believe there should be any changes to the Coalition’s system.
Q: Many of these people have been left in limbo for many years. Is that acceptable?
Andrews:
Obviously, we are, all Australians are always concerned about making sure that people are treated humanely, but the balance has to be keeping Australia’s borders strong and to make sure that no people risk their lives to come to Australia by boat. Now, I remember watching the stories of people being plucked out of the water where their boats had basically disintegrated. And I really wonder if the ministers responsible spoke to the officials who were out there day after day, picking bodies out of the water, because if they haven’t, they should have because that may well have affected how they decided they were going to be deal with border security here in Australia.
Q: And just to clarify, would you support this move if the government can guarantee that people from now on who try to come here will be given TPVs?
Andrews:
I don’t see how they can guarantee it because they’ve opened the gate. OK. This is the thin edge of the wedge. It’s now permanency for people, for those that have arrived before 2013, the pressure will now be on. And, I don’t know that Labor’s got the strength that it needs to be able to stand up to what’s going to be coming their way*.
*Boat turnbacks remain Labor policy. In 2008, when Labor last abolished TPVs, it also stopped naval turnbacks. That is not the case this time around.
Q: Do you think the system should remain as is or do you think there should be any changes?
Andrews:
Well, the system should remain as it was under the Coalition government, not the broken system that Labor’s now overseeing what should happen to the people who came after that deadline, there should be absolutely no changes to Operation Sovereign Borders as it was under the Coalition government. And that would mean that people who came here would remain on temporary protection visas. But those people who came here illegally should be departing the country as soon as they possibly can.
[ad_2]
Source link
