Bruce Lehrmann appeal live: Hearing begins in the Federal Court
Mr Lehrmann sued Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson over an interview on The Project in which Brittany Higgins detailed her rape allegation.
But last year, Justice Michael Lee found, on the balance of probabilities, the former Liberal Party staffer did rape his then-colleague in the Parliament House office of senator Linda Reynolds, though he has consistently denied the allegation.
Follow live.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
31 minutes ago
- ABC News
Productivity summit ends day two with progress on rules changes to boost housing supply
Rules holding back superannuation funds from investing potential billions of dollars into housing and renewables projects could face a shake up, after broad agreement at Canberra's productivity roundtable that there is a need for change. Super funds are required to meet a "performance benchmark", under laws designed to ensure funds are performing and maintaining the retirement savings of their members. But critics have said the rules around those benchmarks discourage investment in some assets, including a rule that requires stamp duty to be disclosed as a fee in a way that they say discourages housing investment. The government flagged it was seeking to rewrite the benchmark after a 2023 review similarly found it could unintentionally be discouraging investment in some assets. Rebecca Mikula-Wright, who heads the Investor Group on Climate Change, said there had been broad agreement at this week's summit that changing those rules could accelerate housing and renewables investment. "The Your Future Your Super performance benchmark was discussed a lot in the session I was in yesterday, and really around how that is constraining the ability of super funds to invest in higher risk projects they really want to invest into," Ms Mikula-Wright told the ABC. 'The treasurer did indicate he is likely to revisit those reforms." After a day of talks focused on finding agreement on one of the thorniest issues impacting housing and the environment — Australia's "broken" environmental approvals process — Treasurer Jim Chalmers expressed his pleasure at the "real prospect of a useful consensus" emerging on some of the country's key economic challenges. "Day two of the reform roundtable was really dominated by how we can boost housing supply, how we can responsibly reduce and improve regulation and speed up approvals," Mr Chalmers said. "I'm really encouraged by the consensus in the room for economic reform in these areas, and we're enthusiastic about some of the policies that participants put on the table." Ms Mikula-Wright said there had also been good support for a Productivity Commission recommendation to establish a "strike team" that could land faster approvals for key infrastructure projects, particularly around renewables. "We're competing with markets that are getting projects up faster and cheaper, so we have to do the same. Then we can attract more capital and get those projects rolling out," she said. After warnings from Housing Minister Clare O'Neil that red tape was dragging down housing approvals — and leaked Treasury documents indicating the government was considering a pause on the National Construction Code — attendees also agreed such a move should take place. The National Construction Code lays out minimum requirements for buildings on everything from fire exits and accessibility to insulation and capacity for electric vehicle chargers. But while changes to safety standards could continue, attendees discussed possible pauses on "non-essential" rules of the construction code, such as new requirements to lift energy efficiency standards. New South Wales Treasurer Daniel Mookhey said a pause on the code was needed, though the finer details were being worked through. "The pause is something that is where the conversation was concentrated on. In terms of how long it needs to be paused, who would do the review, what's the terms of reference, that work can be pursued," he said, "I think we will have a few more conversations at the roundtable and beyond to sort out those levels of detail." The ABC understands the government hopes to move fast on a pause, and not have discussions drag out for several months. After two successive terms of government failing to find a path through the thicket of reform on Australia's Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, attendees of today's roundtable were cautiously welcoming what appeared to be some progress. The complicated laws govern the environmental approval process for major projects, such as energy and mining projects, as well as housing and other developments where they potentially impact threatened species or significant cultural sites. But a major review of those decades-old laws published in 2020 concluded that they were no longer working for business or the environment — a view that today's roundtable attendees were agreed on. However, attempts under former environment minister Tanya Plibersek to update the laws were abandoned before the federal election — with a key sticking point being a plan to introduce a federal watchdog that could independently monitor EPBC approvals. Mining and other business groups did not support that proposed Environmental Protection Agency. But after extended talks today, they left saying they would be prepared to support an EPA, with a caveat that the final say would rest with the environment minister. There are still devils in the detail, including a desire from environment groups to see the EPA also given final approval powers on projects. But it marks the first significant advancement in EPBC discussions since they stalled last term. Australian Conservation Foundation chief executive, Kelly O'Shanassy, said there was agreement in the room that an EPA was needed but there remained different views on how it should operate. "There is a lot of support for efficient decision making, transparent decision making, accountability — that is not the current process," Ms O'Shanassy said. "You need to have an independent regulator that is held to account for the speed of its decisions and the quality of its decisions." Business Council of Australia chief executive, Bran Black, said a federal EPA should effectively be set-up in the same way as existing state-based authorities. "We take the view that it's really important to have a separation between the entity that is ultimately responsible for compliance and the entity that's ultimately responsible for approvals," Mr Black said. "In an ideal world, we wouldn't need to go down the path of creating multiple bodies at all [but] the government has committed to a new EPA. It's made it very clear, that's a point that it's taken to two elections now." "The question then is: what does this EPA do?" Environment Minister Murray Watt said, however, there was strong support around the table for "stronger" environmental protections and "faster and simpler" project approvals, through a more transparent process for businesses. "These are objectives our government supports, but we will ultimately need support across the parliament for reform. It was therefore very useful for the shadow treasurer, as a roundtable participant, to hear the depth of support for change," Senator Watt said. Opposition Leader Sussan Ley said the Coalition was willing to work constructively with the government to see reforms to the environment laws passed.
ABC News
31 minutes ago
- ABC News
Australia defends Anthony Albanese after Israeli leader's attacks
The Federal Government has hit back at Israeli Prime Minister after he called Anthony Albanese a weak politician who had "abandoned Australia's jews". Political Editor Jacob Greber has more.
News.com.au
2 hours ago
- News.com.au
Verbal clash between Australia and Israel sparks community concern
Australia's leading Jewish organisation has issued a rare public rebuke of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Anthony Albanese, as strained relations between the two countries worsened overnight. The group warned that their recent verbal clashes are placing the Jewish community in a vulnerable position. In letters delivered on Tuesday, the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ) said Australian Jews are being drawn into a damaging 'war of words' between the two governments. In the letter to Mr Albanese, the ECAJ said they were 'appalled' by the comments made by the Minister for Home Affairs Tony Burke. Mr Burke on Wednesday criticised Mr Netanyahu, saying, 'Strength is not measured by how many people you can blow up or how many children you can leave hungry.' The ECAJ said it was 'an incendiary and irresponsible comment'. The letter also called out Mr Albanese's own public criticism of Israel, saying his statement accusing Mr Netanyahu of being 'in denial' about the war's consequences was 'excessive and gratuitously insulting.' A similar tone was adopted in the letter to Mr Netanyahu, where the ECAJ condemned his remarks that characterised Mr Albanese as 'a weak politician who betrayed Israel and abandoned Australia's Jews.' Mr Netanyahu had personally attacked Mr Albanese on social media and in a stunning letter obtained by Sky News Australia, following tensions over Labor's decision to recognise Palestine. He accused Mr Albanese of pouring 'fuel on this anti-Semitic fire' by recognising a Palestinian state. '(It) emboldens those who menace Australian Jews and encourages the Jew-hatred now stalking your streets,' Mr Netanyahu said. 'Prime Minister, anti-Semitism is a cancer. It spreads when leaders stay silent. It retreats when leaders act. 'I call upon you to replace weakness with action, appeasement with resolve, and to do so by a clear date: the Jewish New Year, September 23, 2025. 'History will not forgive hesitation. It will honour action.' On X, Mr Netanyahu wrote that history 'will remember Albanese for what he is'. 'A weak politician who betrayed Israel and abandoned Australia's Jews.' The ECAJ described Mr Netanyahu's comments as 'inflammatory and provocative'. '(They) demonstrated a woeful lack of understanding of social and political conditions in Australia,' the ECAJ letter said. 'These comments have played straight into the hands of opponents of Israel and anti-Semites, to the detriment of the Australian Jewish community.' In both letters, the ECAJ urged the leaders to resolve differences through diplomacy rather than public posturing. 'The Australian Jewish community will not be left to deal with the fallout of a spat between two leaders who are playing to their respective domestic audiences.' The letters emphasised that both countries are 'mature democracies' and that their governments should act with the restraint expected of national leaders.
