‘As routine as breathing': TV host slams Welcome to Country ceremonies
'Our politicians gathered in Canberra today for ceremonies marking the start of the new parliamentary term,' Mr Macpherson said.
'In modern Australia, nothing officially starts without someone solemnly reminding us that the land we're on existed before we developed it.
'Ours is a country where 'Welcome to Country' has become as routine as breathing, and just as impossible to opt out of without social repercussions.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
2 hours ago
- Sky News AU
How to watch: The War Cabinet, as Chris Uhlmann presents expert discussion on 'imminent' threat of conflict
Sky News political contributor Chris Uhlmann will host The War Cabinet, a special program where a group of the nation's foremost defence and security experts will discuss the "imminent" threat of conflict involving Australia. The War Cabinet will air live on Sky News at 7:30pm AEST on Monday and will also be available to stream online and through the Sky News Australia app. Uhlmann will be joined by a panel including former foreign minister Alexander Downer, former defence minister Joel Fitzgibbon, former department of home affairs secretary Mike Pezzullo, and Strategic Analysis Australia director Peter Jennings. Drone warfare expert Oleksandra Molloy, CyberCX executive director Katherine Mansted, Strategic Forum CEO Ross Babbage, former major general Mick Ryan, and former naval officer and marine warfare expert Jennifer Parker will also offer key insights into the threats facing Australia. "The threat of a war involving Australia is far greater and more imminent than the public is being told, according to defence experts," Uhlmann said. "China is the main threat. An attack on Taiwan the likely flashpoint, and soon, very soon." Australia's alliance with the United States remains vital, with the AUKUS agreement likely to play a central role. "I think it would be an absurd and reckless decision for an Australian government not to support the Americans," Mr Downer said. However, overreliance on the US has also raised concerns about Australia's independent capability, prompting calls for more investment. "We need to look at a significant, rapid investment of funding into the current Australian defence force," Mr Jennings said. Those calls reflect the reality Australia would be unable to avoid becoming involved should a major conflict erupt in the Indo-Pacific. "Can we sit this out? My view is, we really can't," Mr Babbage said.
ABC News
2 hours ago
- ABC News
While Trump plays with tariffs, Chalmers must find a way to do what Keating did in the 1980s
In the early 1980s, Australia had as big a trade deficit as the United States has now — around 3 to 4 per cent of GDP. But the two solutions to the same problem could not be more different. In the 1980s, then treasurer Paul Keating tore down Australia's imposing tariff wall, but in 2025, US President Donald Trump is doing the opposite — raising tariffs back to levels last seen in 1930. In 1986, I was editor of the Australian Financial Review. On Wednesday, May 14, I got into work at about 10am to find that the Australian dollar was crashing. By the end of the day, it had fallen 3 US cents, one of the biggest one-day falls in history, kicking off a three-month devaluation totalling 21 per cent to less than 60 US cents. It started when Keating was interviewed by John Laws on 2GB that morning and said the collapse in our terms of trade meant that Australia was in danger of becoming a banana republic. (We later learned that he had been standing in the noisy kitchen of a function centre near Melbourne, having just given a breakfast speech, and that what he said was not premeditated.) With economics editor Michael Stutchbury, I sprang into action and marshalled the troops. We got a recording of the interview, transcribed it, and prepared a big front page for the following day. Here's the nub of what Keating told Laws: "It's the price of our commodities — they are as bad in real terms since the Depression … it means an internal adjustment. And if we don't make it this time, we never will make it. If this government cannot get the adjustment, get manufacturing going again and keep moderate wage outcomes and a sensible economic policy, then Australia is basically done for. We will end up being a third-rate economy … a banana republic." Trump's language on April 2 this year was also theatrical and urgent, but he was not foreshadowing an internal adjustment, far from it. "For decades, our country has been looted, pillaged, and plundered by nations near and far, both friend and foe alike," he said. In the executive order he signed that day, Trump declared a "national emergency" that was America's "large and persistent annual US goods trade deficits". That declaration gave him the ability to usurp Congress's constitutional power to impose tariffs. Four months of bruising, chaotic negotiations later, America's average tariff rate has increased from 2.5 per cent to 19 per cent, the same level as that which catastrophically worsened the Great Depression and, as it happens, was the average of most Australian tariffs in 1986. Keating started cutting them in an economic statement to parliament in May 1988. Anything above 15 per cent was cut to 15 per cent, which included the 79 per cent tariff on motor vehicles and 146 per cent on textiles, clothing and footwear, and anything between 10 and 15 per cent was cut to 5 per cent. I asked Keating last week why he decided to do that, and also why he waited two years. His answer to the first question was simple enough: "We had tried the closed way for 70 years and it failed us. We had to open up the economy and become competitive. Also, tariffs are just a tax on working people." Keating told Kerry O'Brien in the interviews for the book Keating, after O'Brien recalled that Bob Hawke had called the interview with Laws a disaster: "That's a post-event re-evaluation. It turned out not to be a disaster but a turning point in the Australian reconstruction to deal with (the) big secular decline in the terms of trade that had begun in the 1960s." As for why he waited two years to start cutting tariffs, Keating told me: "We had to cut government spending first. Australia's government sector was the biggest in the OECD, and the first step had to be getting that down. "We cut government spending from 29.4 per cent of GDP in 1986 to 22.4 per cent in 1989, down seven percentage points, and back to what it was before Whitlam." I asked him whether he had any regrets — after all, the tariff cuts that began in 1988 ended up destroying Australian manufacturing. He replied: "Yes, but Australia's living standards rose. Wages increased and so did profits." Now, Australia's living standards are declining despite higher terms of trade because of weak productivity growth. America's problem in 2025 is similar but different. Productivity is fine, and the trade deficit is the same, but it wasn't caused by a collapse in the terms of trade like Australia in the 80s — America's have fallen just 3.5 per cent in two years. It was caused by the strong US dollar, which was the result of it being the world's reserve currency, and which exacerbated the decline in its comparative advantage, especially versus China. It's obvious that tariffs will not rebuild America's comparative advantage, quite the opposite, but that's not really why Trump is doing it. Trump's using tariffs for two purposes: first to raise revenue while cutting taxes on the rich, because, as Keating says, they are a tax on working people, and second as a non-military assertion of geopolitical power. The reason Trump likes taxing via tariffs is that he can say, and does say, that other countries are paying them. The revenue is now up to $US30 billion a month, and America's working people are starting to realise that they're the ones paying that, which should eventually rebound on the president. But for the moment, he can say, as he did on Saturday, "hundreds of Billions of Dollars are pouring into our Country's coffers" — as if it's coming from somewhere else. The use of tariffs to assert power and/or punish other countries and companies, rather than protect domestic industries, is shown by Brazil's 50 per cent tariff, imposed because former president Jair Bolsonaro is being prosecuted for trying to overturn the election, an activity Trump is in favour of, and India's 50 per cent tariff as punishment for importing Russian oil against sanctions. Also, the CEO of one of the world's biggest companies, Tim Cook of Apple, showed up at the Oval Office last week, lavishing praise and carrying a gift for Trump of a piece of iPhone glass set in a big lump of 24-carat gold, to get Apple's tariff of 100 per cent removed. It worked. He also promised to invest another $US100 billion in US manufacturing, mainly by having the iPhone glass made by Corning at its plant in Kentucky. But that plant is fully automated — the glass is untouched by humans. That's why there's no longer much point in using tariffs these days to try to rebuild a manufacturing industry: the jobs go to robots, not humans. Or rather, the point is not jobs, but profits. That's why the stock market is back at record highs, having fully recovered from the initial tariff meltdown on April 2: tech companies are going to make a ton of money, or at least investors think they will. Economist Nouriel Roubini wrote last week: "The US happens to be at the centre of some of the most important technological innovations in human history. These will deliver a large positive aggregate supply shock that will increase growth and reduce inflation over time. This effect should be an order of magnitude larger than the damage [of tariffs]." So, the US economy is engaged in two historic revolutions at once: dramatically raising import taxes and remaking the global trading system, and at the same time leading a technology revolution — artificial intelligence — that McKinsey & Co says is part of a seismic shift reshaping the world's economy that will have 3,000 times the impact of Britain's Industrial Revolution in the 18th and 19th centuries. And while all this is going on, Australia's current treasurer, Jim Chalmers, will next week conduct a reform roundtable, where 25 or so chosen people will be tasked with finding more tax revenue without the government being voted out, and finding a way to repeat what Keating did in the 1980s and 90s and lift productivity. Good luck with that. Alan Kohler is a finance presenter and columnist on ABC News, and he also writes for Intelligent Investor.
The Advertiser
2 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Australia edges closer to recognising Palestinian state
Australia appears to be gearing up to follow several major Western powers in recognising a Palestinian state at an upcoming United Nations meeting, a top international law expert says. G7 nations France, the UK and Canada have committed to recognising Palestine at the United Nations General Assembly in September amid growing pressure for Israel to end the war in Gaza. Australia looks set to join them after a significant shift in rhetoric in recent weeks, Australian National University professor Donald Rothwell said. "Everything at the moment is pointing towards Australia positioning itself to make an announcement of the recognition of Palestine by the time of the (meeting)," he told AAP. The Albanese government had been "softening" its position on recognising Palestine in the past two weeks, Prof Rothwell noted. "The prime minister is also actually going to the United Nations General Assembly and it's a very long time since the Australian prime minister has gone there," he said. "I'm sure that the prime minister is going there wanting to make an announcement of some significance and this will clearly be a significant announcement." Prof Rothwell also pointed to Foreign Minister Penny Wong's recent stark comments about the humanitarian situation in Gaza and Israel's plan to occupy the territory. "The two-state solution is really just slipping away as a result of Israel's campaign, and Australia doesn't want to lose that opportunity," he said. In a joint statement with several other nations on Saturday, Senator Wong said the countries were committed to implementing a two-state solution to ensure peace for the Israeli and Palestinian people. "A political resolution based on a negotiated two-state solution requires the total demilitarisation of Hamas and its complete exclusion from any form of governance in the Gaza Strip, where the Palestinian Authority must have a central role," the statement said. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke appeared on Sunday to soften the government's stance on the future role of Hamas, a listed terrorist organisation in Australia, in a Palestinian state. He noted terrorist forces had occupied other countries that Australia continued to recognise, citing Syria and Iraq as examples. Prof Rothwell said Syria and Iraq were different from Palestine because Australia had recognised them long before ISIS emerged and took control of large parts. "The minister is making the point … at some point in time, Hamas might play a role in that Palestinian state but that would not see Australia revisit its recognition," he said. Mr Burke might also have been signalling further nuance in Australia's developing position - that it might be prepared to move towards recognition of Palestine while Hamas continued to have a role in Gaza, Prof Rothwell said. Australia appears to be gearing up to follow several major Western powers in recognising a Palestinian state at an upcoming United Nations meeting, a top international law expert says. G7 nations France, the UK and Canada have committed to recognising Palestine at the United Nations General Assembly in September amid growing pressure for Israel to end the war in Gaza. Australia looks set to join them after a significant shift in rhetoric in recent weeks, Australian National University professor Donald Rothwell said. "Everything at the moment is pointing towards Australia positioning itself to make an announcement of the recognition of Palestine by the time of the (meeting)," he told AAP. The Albanese government had been "softening" its position on recognising Palestine in the past two weeks, Prof Rothwell noted. "The prime minister is also actually going to the United Nations General Assembly and it's a very long time since the Australian prime minister has gone there," he said. "I'm sure that the prime minister is going there wanting to make an announcement of some significance and this will clearly be a significant announcement." Prof Rothwell also pointed to Foreign Minister Penny Wong's recent stark comments about the humanitarian situation in Gaza and Israel's plan to occupy the territory. "The two-state solution is really just slipping away as a result of Israel's campaign, and Australia doesn't want to lose that opportunity," he said. In a joint statement with several other nations on Saturday, Senator Wong said the countries were committed to implementing a two-state solution to ensure peace for the Israeli and Palestinian people. "A political resolution based on a negotiated two-state solution requires the total demilitarisation of Hamas and its complete exclusion from any form of governance in the Gaza Strip, where the Palestinian Authority must have a central role," the statement said. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke appeared on Sunday to soften the government's stance on the future role of Hamas, a listed terrorist organisation in Australia, in a Palestinian state. He noted terrorist forces had occupied other countries that Australia continued to recognise, citing Syria and Iraq as examples. Prof Rothwell said Syria and Iraq were different from Palestine because Australia had recognised them long before ISIS emerged and took control of large parts. "The minister is making the point … at some point in time, Hamas might play a role in that Palestinian state but that would not see Australia revisit its recognition," he said. Mr Burke might also have been signalling further nuance in Australia's developing position - that it might be prepared to move towards recognition of Palestine while Hamas continued to have a role in Gaza, Prof Rothwell said. Australia appears to be gearing up to follow several major Western powers in recognising a Palestinian state at an upcoming United Nations meeting, a top international law expert says. G7 nations France, the UK and Canada have committed to recognising Palestine at the United Nations General Assembly in September amid growing pressure for Israel to end the war in Gaza. Australia looks set to join them after a significant shift in rhetoric in recent weeks, Australian National University professor Donald Rothwell said. "Everything at the moment is pointing towards Australia positioning itself to make an announcement of the recognition of Palestine by the time of the (meeting)," he told AAP. The Albanese government had been "softening" its position on recognising Palestine in the past two weeks, Prof Rothwell noted. "The prime minister is also actually going to the United Nations General Assembly and it's a very long time since the Australian prime minister has gone there," he said. "I'm sure that the prime minister is going there wanting to make an announcement of some significance and this will clearly be a significant announcement." Prof Rothwell also pointed to Foreign Minister Penny Wong's recent stark comments about the humanitarian situation in Gaza and Israel's plan to occupy the territory. "The two-state solution is really just slipping away as a result of Israel's campaign, and Australia doesn't want to lose that opportunity," he said. In a joint statement with several other nations on Saturday, Senator Wong said the countries were committed to implementing a two-state solution to ensure peace for the Israeli and Palestinian people. "A political resolution based on a negotiated two-state solution requires the total demilitarisation of Hamas and its complete exclusion from any form of governance in the Gaza Strip, where the Palestinian Authority must have a central role," the statement said. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke appeared on Sunday to soften the government's stance on the future role of Hamas, a listed terrorist organisation in Australia, in a Palestinian state. He noted terrorist forces had occupied other countries that Australia continued to recognise, citing Syria and Iraq as examples. Prof Rothwell said Syria and Iraq were different from Palestine because Australia had recognised them long before ISIS emerged and took control of large parts. "The minister is making the point … at some point in time, Hamas might play a role in that Palestinian state but that would not see Australia revisit its recognition," he said. Mr Burke might also have been signalling further nuance in Australia's developing position - that it might be prepared to move towards recognition of Palestine while Hamas continued to have a role in Gaza, Prof Rothwell said. Australia appears to be gearing up to follow several major Western powers in recognising a Palestinian state at an upcoming United Nations meeting, a top international law expert says. G7 nations France, the UK and Canada have committed to recognising Palestine at the United Nations General Assembly in September amid growing pressure for Israel to end the war in Gaza. Australia looks set to join them after a significant shift in rhetoric in recent weeks, Australian National University professor Donald Rothwell said. "Everything at the moment is pointing towards Australia positioning itself to make an announcement of the recognition of Palestine by the time of the (meeting)," he told AAP. The Albanese government had been "softening" its position on recognising Palestine in the past two weeks, Prof Rothwell noted. "The prime minister is also actually going to the United Nations General Assembly and it's a very long time since the Australian prime minister has gone there," he said. "I'm sure that the prime minister is going there wanting to make an announcement of some significance and this will clearly be a significant announcement." Prof Rothwell also pointed to Foreign Minister Penny Wong's recent stark comments about the humanitarian situation in Gaza and Israel's plan to occupy the territory. "The two-state solution is really just slipping away as a result of Israel's campaign, and Australia doesn't want to lose that opportunity," he said. In a joint statement with several other nations on Saturday, Senator Wong said the countries were committed to implementing a two-state solution to ensure peace for the Israeli and Palestinian people. "A political resolution based on a negotiated two-state solution requires the total demilitarisation of Hamas and its complete exclusion from any form of governance in the Gaza Strip, where the Palestinian Authority must have a central role," the statement said. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke appeared on Sunday to soften the government's stance on the future role of Hamas, a listed terrorist organisation in Australia, in a Palestinian state. He noted terrorist forces had occupied other countries that Australia continued to recognise, citing Syria and Iraq as examples. Prof Rothwell said Syria and Iraq were different from Palestine because Australia had recognised them long before ISIS emerged and took control of large parts. "The minister is making the point … at some point in time, Hamas might play a role in that Palestinian state but that would not see Australia revisit its recognition," he said. Mr Burke might also have been signalling further nuance in Australia's developing position - that it might be prepared to move towards recognition of Palestine while Hamas continued to have a role in Gaza, Prof Rothwell said.
