How Mark Latham could be kicked out of NSW Parliament
Latham denies the accusations made by Nathalie Matthews. Separately, he has a significant legal bill hanging over his head that, if he cannot pay, it will probably force him into bankruptcy and out of parliament. It is a live risk for Latham that could materialise this year.
Under the NSW Constitution Act 1902, any member of either house of parliament who 'becomes bankrupt or takes the benefit of any law for the relief of bankrupt or insolvent debtors' must have their seat declared vacant.
If Latham does not have the means to pay $140,000 plus legal costs, which already exceed half a million dollars in total, the one-time federal Labor leader will be disqualified from office.
His possible bankruptcy stems from the ex-NSW One Nation leader defaming Sydney MP Alex Greenwich in a highly graphic and offensive tweet (which the Herald chooses not to repeat).
In a decision last year, the Federal Court awarded Greenwich $140,000 in damages over the post on Twitter, now X, in March 2023. Greenwich's barrister, Dr Matt Collins, KC, told the court that the tweet, which described sexual activity in graphic and offensive terms, was a 'vile, homophobic attack' on the openly gay Greenwich.
Loading
Federal Court Justice David O'Callaghan this year ordered Latham to pay Greenwich's legal costs of the defamation case on the ordinary basis, which results in the successful party recouping about 70 per cent of their bills.
The independent Sydney MP's costs have been estimated at more than $600,000. And it does not end there for Latham.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
an hour ago
- Sky News AU
Allan government ‘pandering to the minority' with latest Indigenous naming policy
Sky News host Steve Price has slammed the Victorian government for "pandering to a minority' by deciding to name new schools after Indigenous words rather than suburbs. The Labor state government in Victoria has declared that First Nations language names will be used for all new state schools and campuses from this year onwards. 'Why are we surprised, given Victoria is deep into a secret treaty negotiation with Indigenous groups, costing millions of dollars that we are not even allowed to know about,' Mr Price said.
The Advertiser
an hour ago
- The Advertiser
Red tape on chopping block in bid to build homes faster
The need to simplify the regulation of housing and environmental approvals has received widespread support at a major economic reform summit. But the devil, as always, is in the detail and divisions remain over the specifics. Treasurer Jim Chalmers promised "win-wins" on Wednesday morning at day two of his economic reform roundtable and unions and business found one in a plan to simplify the National Construction Code. Housing Minister Clare O'Neil garnered broad support over the need for a pause to the National Construction Code for the life of the housing accord, which runs until mid-2029 and sets a target for 1.2 million new homes. Changes to the code that deal with safety issues such as fireproofing would be exempt from a pause. But a broader rewrite was also possible. Master Builders Australia has been pushing for a review into "non-essential" changes, including EV charging requirements, which they argue increase the cost and complexity of building new homes. Australian Council of Trade Unions president Michele O'Neil said it was important to keep improving energy efficiency of new homes but acknowledged the nearly-3000 page document was "clunky", and called for more support for modular housing. Not all were on board with the pause. Australian Council of Social Service chief executive Cassandra Goldie was concerned about it leading to poorer housing quality, while outspoken Labor backbencher Ed Husic told the ABC it would mean "repeating the bad mistakes of the coalition". The opposition took a 10-year pause of the code to the last election, a policy which was not supported by Labor at the time, but Treasury advised pausing changes to the code in a document leaked ahead of the roundtable. The ACTU's Ms O'Neil agreed with business groups and the superannuation industry that there was need to reform the super performance test, which disincentivised long-term investments in housing and clean energy. There was also support for reforming the Howard-era Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation rules. Unions, employer groups and environmentalists all agreed the act was no longer fit for purpose. They want a new act that provides faster decisions for projects from mining to housing. Shadow treasurer Ted O'Brien said he would be as constructive as he could but would hold fire on supporting either of the proposals until he saw more details from Labor. Australian Conservation Foundation chief executive Kelly O'Shanassy said there was consensus for the creation of a national environment protection agency, but the "devil is in the detail". While business groups want the EPA to only deal with compliance and not project approvals, Ms O'Shanassy said you needed an independent regulator that is held to account for the speed and quality of its decisions. "So I would put to the folks who don't like the idea of a national EPA making decisions: what's your plan to get better, faster, more predictable decisions for your company and better outcomes for nature?" she said. NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey, who is representing all the states and territories at the roundtable, said he wanted the federal government's $900 million productivity fund increased, calling it an "excellent start". Increasing the fund could help other states and territories follow NSW's lead in adopting artificial intelligence to speed up planning approvals, he said. Regulation of AI has been a major dividing line between employers and unions heading into the roundtable, with the ACTU calling for the government to force employers to consult with staff before introducing AI tools to the workplace. But Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox said there was little conflict with the peak union body in discussions about AI on Wednesday afternoon. The need to simplify the regulation of housing and environmental approvals has received widespread support at a major economic reform summit. But the devil, as always, is in the detail and divisions remain over the specifics. Treasurer Jim Chalmers promised "win-wins" on Wednesday morning at day two of his economic reform roundtable and unions and business found one in a plan to simplify the National Construction Code. Housing Minister Clare O'Neil garnered broad support over the need for a pause to the National Construction Code for the life of the housing accord, which runs until mid-2029 and sets a target for 1.2 million new homes. Changes to the code that deal with safety issues such as fireproofing would be exempt from a pause. But a broader rewrite was also possible. Master Builders Australia has been pushing for a review into "non-essential" changes, including EV charging requirements, which they argue increase the cost and complexity of building new homes. Australian Council of Trade Unions president Michele O'Neil said it was important to keep improving energy efficiency of new homes but acknowledged the nearly-3000 page document was "clunky", and called for more support for modular housing. Not all were on board with the pause. Australian Council of Social Service chief executive Cassandra Goldie was concerned about it leading to poorer housing quality, while outspoken Labor backbencher Ed Husic told the ABC it would mean "repeating the bad mistakes of the coalition". The opposition took a 10-year pause of the code to the last election, a policy which was not supported by Labor at the time, but Treasury advised pausing changes to the code in a document leaked ahead of the roundtable. The ACTU's Ms O'Neil agreed with business groups and the superannuation industry that there was need to reform the super performance test, which disincentivised long-term investments in housing and clean energy. There was also support for reforming the Howard-era Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation rules. Unions, employer groups and environmentalists all agreed the act was no longer fit for purpose. They want a new act that provides faster decisions for projects from mining to housing. Shadow treasurer Ted O'Brien said he would be as constructive as he could but would hold fire on supporting either of the proposals until he saw more details from Labor. Australian Conservation Foundation chief executive Kelly O'Shanassy said there was consensus for the creation of a national environment protection agency, but the "devil is in the detail". While business groups want the EPA to only deal with compliance and not project approvals, Ms O'Shanassy said you needed an independent regulator that is held to account for the speed and quality of its decisions. "So I would put to the folks who don't like the idea of a national EPA making decisions: what's your plan to get better, faster, more predictable decisions for your company and better outcomes for nature?" she said. NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey, who is representing all the states and territories at the roundtable, said he wanted the federal government's $900 million productivity fund increased, calling it an "excellent start". Increasing the fund could help other states and territories follow NSW's lead in adopting artificial intelligence to speed up planning approvals, he said. Regulation of AI has been a major dividing line between employers and unions heading into the roundtable, with the ACTU calling for the government to force employers to consult with staff before introducing AI tools to the workplace. But Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox said there was little conflict with the peak union body in discussions about AI on Wednesday afternoon. The need to simplify the regulation of housing and environmental approvals has received widespread support at a major economic reform summit. But the devil, as always, is in the detail and divisions remain over the specifics. Treasurer Jim Chalmers promised "win-wins" on Wednesday morning at day two of his economic reform roundtable and unions and business found one in a plan to simplify the National Construction Code. Housing Minister Clare O'Neil garnered broad support over the need for a pause to the National Construction Code for the life of the housing accord, which runs until mid-2029 and sets a target for 1.2 million new homes. Changes to the code that deal with safety issues such as fireproofing would be exempt from a pause. But a broader rewrite was also possible. Master Builders Australia has been pushing for a review into "non-essential" changes, including EV charging requirements, which they argue increase the cost and complexity of building new homes. Australian Council of Trade Unions president Michele O'Neil said it was important to keep improving energy efficiency of new homes but acknowledged the nearly-3000 page document was "clunky", and called for more support for modular housing. Not all were on board with the pause. Australian Council of Social Service chief executive Cassandra Goldie was concerned about it leading to poorer housing quality, while outspoken Labor backbencher Ed Husic told the ABC it would mean "repeating the bad mistakes of the coalition". The opposition took a 10-year pause of the code to the last election, a policy which was not supported by Labor at the time, but Treasury advised pausing changes to the code in a document leaked ahead of the roundtable. The ACTU's Ms O'Neil agreed with business groups and the superannuation industry that there was need to reform the super performance test, which disincentivised long-term investments in housing and clean energy. There was also support for reforming the Howard-era Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation rules. Unions, employer groups and environmentalists all agreed the act was no longer fit for purpose. They want a new act that provides faster decisions for projects from mining to housing. Shadow treasurer Ted O'Brien said he would be as constructive as he could but would hold fire on supporting either of the proposals until he saw more details from Labor. Australian Conservation Foundation chief executive Kelly O'Shanassy said there was consensus for the creation of a national environment protection agency, but the "devil is in the detail". While business groups want the EPA to only deal with compliance and not project approvals, Ms O'Shanassy said you needed an independent regulator that is held to account for the speed and quality of its decisions. "So I would put to the folks who don't like the idea of a national EPA making decisions: what's your plan to get better, faster, more predictable decisions for your company and better outcomes for nature?" she said. NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey, who is representing all the states and territories at the roundtable, said he wanted the federal government's $900 million productivity fund increased, calling it an "excellent start". Increasing the fund could help other states and territories follow NSW's lead in adopting artificial intelligence to speed up planning approvals, he said. Regulation of AI has been a major dividing line between employers and unions heading into the roundtable, with the ACTU calling for the government to force employers to consult with staff before introducing AI tools to the workplace. But Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox said there was little conflict with the peak union body in discussions about AI on Wednesday afternoon. The need to simplify the regulation of housing and environmental approvals has received widespread support at a major economic reform summit. But the devil, as always, is in the detail and divisions remain over the specifics. Treasurer Jim Chalmers promised "win-wins" on Wednesday morning at day two of his economic reform roundtable and unions and business found one in a plan to simplify the National Construction Code. Housing Minister Clare O'Neil garnered broad support over the need for a pause to the National Construction Code for the life of the housing accord, which runs until mid-2029 and sets a target for 1.2 million new homes. Changes to the code that deal with safety issues such as fireproofing would be exempt from a pause. But a broader rewrite was also possible. Master Builders Australia has been pushing for a review into "non-essential" changes, including EV charging requirements, which they argue increase the cost and complexity of building new homes. Australian Council of Trade Unions president Michele O'Neil said it was important to keep improving energy efficiency of new homes but acknowledged the nearly-3000 page document was "clunky", and called for more support for modular housing. Not all were on board with the pause. Australian Council of Social Service chief executive Cassandra Goldie was concerned about it leading to poorer housing quality, while outspoken Labor backbencher Ed Husic told the ABC it would mean "repeating the bad mistakes of the coalition". The opposition took a 10-year pause of the code to the last election, a policy which was not supported by Labor at the time, but Treasury advised pausing changes to the code in a document leaked ahead of the roundtable. The ACTU's Ms O'Neil agreed with business groups and the superannuation industry that there was need to reform the super performance test, which disincentivised long-term investments in housing and clean energy. There was also support for reforming the Howard-era Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation rules. Unions, employer groups and environmentalists all agreed the act was no longer fit for purpose. They want a new act that provides faster decisions for projects from mining to housing. Shadow treasurer Ted O'Brien said he would be as constructive as he could but would hold fire on supporting either of the proposals until he saw more details from Labor. Australian Conservation Foundation chief executive Kelly O'Shanassy said there was consensus for the creation of a national environment protection agency, but the "devil is in the detail". While business groups want the EPA to only deal with compliance and not project approvals, Ms O'Shanassy said you needed an independent regulator that is held to account for the speed and quality of its decisions. "So I would put to the folks who don't like the idea of a national EPA making decisions: what's your plan to get better, faster, more predictable decisions for your company and better outcomes for nature?" she said. NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey, who is representing all the states and territories at the roundtable, said he wanted the federal government's $900 million productivity fund increased, calling it an "excellent start". Increasing the fund could help other states and territories follow NSW's lead in adopting artificial intelligence to speed up planning approvals, he said. Regulation of AI has been a major dividing line between employers and unions heading into the roundtable, with the ACTU calling for the government to force employers to consult with staff before introducing AI tools to the workplace. But Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox said there was little conflict with the peak union body in discussions about AI on Wednesday afternoon.
The Advertiser
2 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Aussie anxiety fuelling AUKUS submarine social licence
Global volatility reflected in the mood of the nation is giving the federal government the necessary social licence to push on with the AUKUS submarine project, the defence minister says. Public trust has been achieved in communities across the nation but it's an ongoing job that requires "constant nurturing", Richard Marles told the Submarine Institute of Australia conference in Perth on Wednesday. "People's heads are in the right place," he said. "People do have a sense of anxiety that the world is a pretty complex and volatile place. "That is how I would describe the mood of the nation, and that does give a basis upon which you can then provide a narrative about why we would be spending a very considerable amount of money on this particular platform." Mr Marles said Australia was providing submissions for the US AUKUS review and was "fully across" its process and timing. The review should "pull no punches" about areas where improvement could be achieved, he said. "Obviously there are areas where we would like to be going faster than we are," he said. "It would be extraordinary to be standing up here and saying everything is tickety-boo. "Things are pretty good, like I really think the glass is more than half full, but there is absolutely room for improvement." Australia continues to take significant, groundbreaking steps in preparation to receive, build and operate nuclear submarines, but the timeline was tight, he said. "I'm acutely aware that a milestone missed now cascades into other milestones becoming much further delayed down the track," Mr Marles said. "So there's a relentless focus right now to make sure we are not letting any milestones slip." The trilateral security pact between Australia, the UK and the US to supply nuclear submarines at an estimated cost of $368 billion has been slammed since it was announced in March 2023. Former prime ministers Malcolm Turnbull and Paul Keating and former Labor foreign minister Gareth Evans are among those who have criticised the deal amid ongoing protest across the nation. The Australian Greens also oppose the pact, along with the members of the Australian Anti-AUKUS Coalition, which is made up of peace, community, environment, social justice, independence, faith and socialist organisations and unions. Global volatility reflected in the mood of the nation is giving the federal government the necessary social licence to push on with the AUKUS submarine project, the defence minister says. Public trust has been achieved in communities across the nation but it's an ongoing job that requires "constant nurturing", Richard Marles told the Submarine Institute of Australia conference in Perth on Wednesday. "People's heads are in the right place," he said. "People do have a sense of anxiety that the world is a pretty complex and volatile place. "That is how I would describe the mood of the nation, and that does give a basis upon which you can then provide a narrative about why we would be spending a very considerable amount of money on this particular platform." Mr Marles said Australia was providing submissions for the US AUKUS review and was "fully across" its process and timing. The review should "pull no punches" about areas where improvement could be achieved, he said. "Obviously there are areas where we would like to be going faster than we are," he said. "It would be extraordinary to be standing up here and saying everything is tickety-boo. "Things are pretty good, like I really think the glass is more than half full, but there is absolutely room for improvement." Australia continues to take significant, groundbreaking steps in preparation to receive, build and operate nuclear submarines, but the timeline was tight, he said. "I'm acutely aware that a milestone missed now cascades into other milestones becoming much further delayed down the track," Mr Marles said. "So there's a relentless focus right now to make sure we are not letting any milestones slip." The trilateral security pact between Australia, the UK and the US to supply nuclear submarines at an estimated cost of $368 billion has been slammed since it was announced in March 2023. Former prime ministers Malcolm Turnbull and Paul Keating and former Labor foreign minister Gareth Evans are among those who have criticised the deal amid ongoing protest across the nation. The Australian Greens also oppose the pact, along with the members of the Australian Anti-AUKUS Coalition, which is made up of peace, community, environment, social justice, independence, faith and socialist organisations and unions. Global volatility reflected in the mood of the nation is giving the federal government the necessary social licence to push on with the AUKUS submarine project, the defence minister says. Public trust has been achieved in communities across the nation but it's an ongoing job that requires "constant nurturing", Richard Marles told the Submarine Institute of Australia conference in Perth on Wednesday. "People's heads are in the right place," he said. "People do have a sense of anxiety that the world is a pretty complex and volatile place. "That is how I would describe the mood of the nation, and that does give a basis upon which you can then provide a narrative about why we would be spending a very considerable amount of money on this particular platform." Mr Marles said Australia was providing submissions for the US AUKUS review and was "fully across" its process and timing. The review should "pull no punches" about areas where improvement could be achieved, he said. "Obviously there are areas where we would like to be going faster than we are," he said. "It would be extraordinary to be standing up here and saying everything is tickety-boo. "Things are pretty good, like I really think the glass is more than half full, but there is absolutely room for improvement." Australia continues to take significant, groundbreaking steps in preparation to receive, build and operate nuclear submarines, but the timeline was tight, he said. "I'm acutely aware that a milestone missed now cascades into other milestones becoming much further delayed down the track," Mr Marles said. "So there's a relentless focus right now to make sure we are not letting any milestones slip." The trilateral security pact between Australia, the UK and the US to supply nuclear submarines at an estimated cost of $368 billion has been slammed since it was announced in March 2023. Former prime ministers Malcolm Turnbull and Paul Keating and former Labor foreign minister Gareth Evans are among those who have criticised the deal amid ongoing protest across the nation. The Australian Greens also oppose the pact, along with the members of the Australian Anti-AUKUS Coalition, which is made up of peace, community, environment, social justice, independence, faith and socialist organisations and unions. Global volatility reflected in the mood of the nation is giving the federal government the necessary social licence to push on with the AUKUS submarine project, the defence minister says. Public trust has been achieved in communities across the nation but it's an ongoing job that requires "constant nurturing", Richard Marles told the Submarine Institute of Australia conference in Perth on Wednesday. "People's heads are in the right place," he said. "People do have a sense of anxiety that the world is a pretty complex and volatile place. "That is how I would describe the mood of the nation, and that does give a basis upon which you can then provide a narrative about why we would be spending a very considerable amount of money on this particular platform." Mr Marles said Australia was providing submissions for the US AUKUS review and was "fully across" its process and timing. The review should "pull no punches" about areas where improvement could be achieved, he said. "Obviously there are areas where we would like to be going faster than we are," he said. "It would be extraordinary to be standing up here and saying everything is tickety-boo. "Things are pretty good, like I really think the glass is more than half full, but there is absolutely room for improvement." Australia continues to take significant, groundbreaking steps in preparation to receive, build and operate nuclear submarines, but the timeline was tight, he said. "I'm acutely aware that a milestone missed now cascades into other milestones becoming much further delayed down the track," Mr Marles said. "So there's a relentless focus right now to make sure we are not letting any milestones slip." The trilateral security pact between Australia, the UK and the US to supply nuclear submarines at an estimated cost of $368 billion has been slammed since it was announced in March 2023. Former prime ministers Malcolm Turnbull and Paul Keating and former Labor foreign minister Gareth Evans are among those who have criticised the deal amid ongoing protest across the nation. The Australian Greens also oppose the pact, along with the members of the Australian Anti-AUKUS Coalition, which is made up of peace, community, environment, social justice, independence, faith and socialist organisations and unions.
