Watt offers miners no guarantees on looming green reforms
Watt met with mining executives, green groups and West Australian Premier Roger Cook on Tuesday as he worked to land the Albanese government's promised overhaul of environmental laws that were abandoned in its first term amid intense opposition from the resources sector.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Courier-Mail
an hour ago
- Courier-Mail
Revealed: How Australia's new EV tax rollout will work
Don't miss out on the headlines from National. Followed categories will be added to My News. EXCLUSIVE Australia's new tax on electric vehicle drivers is set to kick off with a trial period for trucks before it stings cars. can reveal that the Albanese Government is looking at a staged rollout to test the proposed new EV tax and trucks will be the first cab off the rank. It is also interested in a new road user charge that sends price signals on the best time to be on the road, or the freeway. Over time, it could replace petrol taxes and apply to all cars based on distance travelled and when cars and trucks are on the road to tackle congestion. Don't miss a ding! Get all the latest Australian news as it happens — download the app direct to your phone. Free ride for EVs nearly over The free ride enjoyed by drivers of electric vehicles is coming to a close with Treasurer Jim Chalmers and state governments finalising plans for a new road-user charge. All Australian motorists who buy petrol and diesel at the bowser pay 51.6 cents a litre in fuel excise. But drivers of EV vehicles pay nothing. 'The status quo won't be sustainable over the next decade or two,'' Treasurer Jim Chalmers told 'As more and more people get off petrol cars and into EVs we've got to make sure that the tax arrangements support investment in roads. 'But we're in no rush, changes of this nature will be made, because the status quo won't work in 10 or 20 years.' Treasurer Jim Chalmers has shared some details of the government's plan. Picture: NewsWire / Martin Ollman The Treasurer says roads won't keep up without a new system for charging users, with potholes like these in Sydney this week becoming more common. Picture: Richard Dobson The Treasurer made no secret of his support for a road user charge before the election, but favours a staged rollout of the changes. Based on a planned NSW road user scheme, a national rollout will depend on your mileage but might cost between $300 and $400 a year. Victorian Treasurer Tim Pallas said that electric vehicles are 'heavier and do more damage to the road network as a consequence than do internal combustion engine vehicles'. 'By giving drivers a clear signal about the cost of infrastructure, they would have an incentive to use it more efficiently,' the Productivity Commission report said. How does fuel excise work? The current rate of fuel excise is 51.6 cents in excise for every litre of fuel purchased. For a typical household with a car running on petrol, the tax costs more than $1200 a year. But the flat sales tax isn't paid by drivers of pure electric vehicles, who simply need to plug in their cars to recharge. While registration and driver's licence fees go to state and territory governments, fuel excise is collected by the federal government. Australian motorists paid an estimated $15.71 billion in net fuel excise in 2023-24, and are expected to pay $67.6 billion over the four years to 2026-27. However, governments have long-warned that a road-user charge will be required to fill the gap in the budget left by declining revenue from the fuel excise, as the petrol and diesel engines in new cars consume less fuel and Australians adopt hybrid and electric cars. Chinese tech to change EVs Rapid charging tech promised by China's CATL could put electric cars in top gear, as David McCowen reports. Video Player is loading. Play Video This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Opaque Semi-Transparent Text Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Caption Area Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Drop shadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. X Learn More Loaded : 37.82% 0:00 00:00 / 00:00 Close Modal Dialog This is a modal window. This modal can be closed by pressing the Escape key or activating the close button. 00:26 SUBSCRIBER ONLY Chinese tech to change EVs China's... more CATL could put electric cars in top gear, as David McCowen reports. Rapid charging tech promised by... more ... more A road user charge is needed to fill the gap left by the decreasingly profitable fuel excise. Picture: NewsWire / Nicholas Eagar What does the AAA say? The Australian Automobile Association (AAA) is calling for a national approach to road-user charging but wants a guarantee the revenue will be earmarked for road upgrades. The AAA backs a distance-based road-user charging as a fairer and more equitable way to fund land transport infrastructure. The 2024 federal budget forecasted a reduction in fuel excise receipts by $470 million over four years from 2024-25. Roadblocks to reform Currently, New South Wales is the only state with firm plans to introduce a road-user charge from 2027 or when EVs reach 30 per cent of new car sales. Plug-in hybrid EVs will be charged a fixed 80 per cent proportion of the full road-user charge to reflect their vehicle type. Western Australia has also stated an intention to implement a road-user charge. Meanwhile, Victoria's electric vehicle levy had to be scrapped following a ruling from the High Court. Our road infrastructure must be maintained as heavier EVs do increasing damage. Picture: Alan Barber Two Victorian electric car owners launched a legal challenge on the basis the tax was not legal as it was an excise that only a federal government could impose. They won, with the High Court upholding the legal challenge. There have been several false starts to enshrine a road-user charge including in South Australia, where the former Liberal Government planned to introduce a charge for plug-in electric and other zero emission vehicles, which included a fixed component and a variable charge based on distance travelled. It was later pushed back to 2027 due to a backlash before the legislation was ultimately repealed. 'Gold standard' for reform Some experts argue the gold standard for reform is a variable rate that factors in the vehicle's mass, distance travelled, location, and time of day. But there's a big barrier to the Commonwealth imposing those charges because the Constitution prohibits it from imposing taxes that discriminate between states or parts of states. State governments could impose those levies, but as the experience of the Victorian Government underlines, it is legally complex. Originally published as How the Albanese Government plans to revolutionise the taxes you pay for driving a car
The Advertiser
2 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Living in Australia is just less fair than it used to be
Labor has never been in a better position to implement its national policy platform. But will the Albanese government spend the next three years using its thumping majority to lead bold reforms or deliver damp squib solutions? Next week's productivity roundtable will reveal which path the Prime Minister intends to tread, and so far, it looks like all it's set to do is weaken environment laws and delay big tax reforms until after the next election. Between the Treasury advice leaked to the ABC and the Prime Minister ruling out any major tax reforms before the next election, the government poured a bucket of cold water on any real excitement building for the productivity roundtable. And the productivity roundtable has a big job ahead of it. Australia doesn't just have a productivity problem, it has a revenue problem. Australia is one of the lowest-taxing countries in the developed world. In fact, if Australia collected the OECD average in tax - not the highest amount, just the average - the Commonwealth would have had an extra $140 billion in revenue in 2023-24. To put that in perspective, it's equivalent to the combined cost of the aged pension, the NDIS, Jobseeker, and the child care subsidy, along with the total government spending on housing, vocational education, and both the ABC and SBS. It's clear that bold tax reforms are necessary. Despite being a low-tax country, Australia is still one of the richest countries on Earth. Yet many people's living standards have been going backwards. Why? Lots of reasons. The Coalition enacted policies that deliberately kept wages low. So, when excessive corporate profits drove inflation after the pandemic, the cost of everyday living rose faster than people's paychecks could keep up. Allowing multinational gas companies to export 80 per cent of Australia's gas tripled domestic gas prices and doubled wholesale electricity prices on the east coast of Australia. Climate change-fuelled extreme weather is driving up insurance costs and premiums. The cost of buying a house is now out of reach for most young people, and the cost of renting has skyrocketed, too. This is how most people experience an increase in inequality - your paycheck doesn't go as far as it used to. But those everyday cost-of-living increases obscure a larger truth about the Australian economy. It's just less fair than it used to be. It used to be that a rising tide lifted all boats. When the economy grew, Australians all shared the benefits. If you imagine Australian economic growth were a cake shared between 10 people, in the decades after World War II, the bottom 90 per cent of Australians used to get 9 pieces of cake, leaving one piece for the top 10 per cent. In the decade after the Global Financial Crisis, the richest person at the table ate nine pieces of cake, and the bottom 90 per cent of people shared less than one piece of cake between them. It's hugely unfair. There's not much point boosting productivity if a majority of working people don't get to share in the benefits. Treasurer Jim Chalmers is keen to have that debate. He described the game of ruling things in or out as "cancerous" and vowed to dial up Labor's ambition for bold reforms. And let's be clear, to reverse that path of Australia's growing inequality will require bold tax reforms. It's clear the Treasurer understands that, as well as several of the roundtable invitees, who want tax reform on the agenda at the productivity roundtable. The ACTU submission included several tax reforms, including to negative gearing and the CGT discount, but also reforming the broken Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (PRRT) and replacing it with a new 25 per cent export levy on gas. Negative gearing together with the CGT discount has so warped our housing market, many young Australians have given up on every owning their own home. But it looks like the PM has put off reforming those distortionary tax concessions until his next term of government. He keeps hosing down suggestions for progressive tax reforms. To hear the Prime Minister rule out any major tax reforms before the next election is not just disappointing, it's irresponsible. There are also reports that the government is considering introducing road user charges for electric vehicles only. If we're talking road user charges, it would make sense to include heavy vehicles, which do so much damage to our roads - a vehicle that's twice the weight of a regular vehicle does 16 times the damage to the road. But heavy vehicles don't pay anything extra for that damage. But will heavy vehicles be included in any new road user charges? Doesn't look like it. READ MORE EBONY BENNETT: The fact that Labor is considering slugging electric vehicle drivers with a new tax, while doing nothing to stop half of Australia's gas being exported royalty-free, tells you everything you need to know. Big tax reforms are on the table for electric vehicles, but off the table for the gas industry. Yet, according to the Treasury advice leaked to the ABC, the government will consider other major reforms. For example, it will weaken - sorry, "streamline" - our national environment laws to make development easier. And it will consider cutting "red tape" by freezing changes to the National Construction Code. Labor has a thumping majority in the lower house and it can pass progressive reforms through the Senate with the support of the Greens any time it wants. Instead, the government's productivity agenda seems to be to weaken environment laws, tax clean vehicles, cut red tape for property developers and leave the difficult tax reforms until after the next election. It's a far cry from Albanese's promise in Labor's election platform, to be a government "as courageous and hardworking and caring as the Australian people are themselves." Labor has never been in a better position to implement its national policy platform. But will the Albanese government spend the next three years using its thumping majority to lead bold reforms or deliver damp squib solutions? Next week's productivity roundtable will reveal which path the Prime Minister intends to tread, and so far, it looks like all it's set to do is weaken environment laws and delay big tax reforms until after the next election. Between the Treasury advice leaked to the ABC and the Prime Minister ruling out any major tax reforms before the next election, the government poured a bucket of cold water on any real excitement building for the productivity roundtable. And the productivity roundtable has a big job ahead of it. Australia doesn't just have a productivity problem, it has a revenue problem. Australia is one of the lowest-taxing countries in the developed world. In fact, if Australia collected the OECD average in tax - not the highest amount, just the average - the Commonwealth would have had an extra $140 billion in revenue in 2023-24. To put that in perspective, it's equivalent to the combined cost of the aged pension, the NDIS, Jobseeker, and the child care subsidy, along with the total government spending on housing, vocational education, and both the ABC and SBS. It's clear that bold tax reforms are necessary. Despite being a low-tax country, Australia is still one of the richest countries on Earth. Yet many people's living standards have been going backwards. Why? Lots of reasons. The Coalition enacted policies that deliberately kept wages low. So, when excessive corporate profits drove inflation after the pandemic, the cost of everyday living rose faster than people's paychecks could keep up. Allowing multinational gas companies to export 80 per cent of Australia's gas tripled domestic gas prices and doubled wholesale electricity prices on the east coast of Australia. Climate change-fuelled extreme weather is driving up insurance costs and premiums. The cost of buying a house is now out of reach for most young people, and the cost of renting has skyrocketed, too. This is how most people experience an increase in inequality - your paycheck doesn't go as far as it used to. But those everyday cost-of-living increases obscure a larger truth about the Australian economy. It's just less fair than it used to be. It used to be that a rising tide lifted all boats. When the economy grew, Australians all shared the benefits. If you imagine Australian economic growth were a cake shared between 10 people, in the decades after World War II, the bottom 90 per cent of Australians used to get 9 pieces of cake, leaving one piece for the top 10 per cent. In the decade after the Global Financial Crisis, the richest person at the table ate nine pieces of cake, and the bottom 90 per cent of people shared less than one piece of cake between them. It's hugely unfair. There's not much point boosting productivity if a majority of working people don't get to share in the benefits. Treasurer Jim Chalmers is keen to have that debate. He described the game of ruling things in or out as "cancerous" and vowed to dial up Labor's ambition for bold reforms. And let's be clear, to reverse that path of Australia's growing inequality will require bold tax reforms. It's clear the Treasurer understands that, as well as several of the roundtable invitees, who want tax reform on the agenda at the productivity roundtable. The ACTU submission included several tax reforms, including to negative gearing and the CGT discount, but also reforming the broken Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (PRRT) and replacing it with a new 25 per cent export levy on gas. Negative gearing together with the CGT discount has so warped our housing market, many young Australians have given up on every owning their own home. But it looks like the PM has put off reforming those distortionary tax concessions until his next term of government. He keeps hosing down suggestions for progressive tax reforms. To hear the Prime Minister rule out any major tax reforms before the next election is not just disappointing, it's irresponsible. There are also reports that the government is considering introducing road user charges for electric vehicles only. If we're talking road user charges, it would make sense to include heavy vehicles, which do so much damage to our roads - a vehicle that's twice the weight of a regular vehicle does 16 times the damage to the road. But heavy vehicles don't pay anything extra for that damage. But will heavy vehicles be included in any new road user charges? Doesn't look like it. READ MORE EBONY BENNETT: The fact that Labor is considering slugging electric vehicle drivers with a new tax, while doing nothing to stop half of Australia's gas being exported royalty-free, tells you everything you need to know. Big tax reforms are on the table for electric vehicles, but off the table for the gas industry. Yet, according to the Treasury advice leaked to the ABC, the government will consider other major reforms. For example, it will weaken - sorry, "streamline" - our national environment laws to make development easier. And it will consider cutting "red tape" by freezing changes to the National Construction Code. Labor has a thumping majority in the lower house and it can pass progressive reforms through the Senate with the support of the Greens any time it wants. Instead, the government's productivity agenda seems to be to weaken environment laws, tax clean vehicles, cut red tape for property developers and leave the difficult tax reforms until after the next election. It's a far cry from Albanese's promise in Labor's election platform, to be a government "as courageous and hardworking and caring as the Australian people are themselves." Labor has never been in a better position to implement its national policy platform. But will the Albanese government spend the next three years using its thumping majority to lead bold reforms or deliver damp squib solutions? Next week's productivity roundtable will reveal which path the Prime Minister intends to tread, and so far, it looks like all it's set to do is weaken environment laws and delay big tax reforms until after the next election. Between the Treasury advice leaked to the ABC and the Prime Minister ruling out any major tax reforms before the next election, the government poured a bucket of cold water on any real excitement building for the productivity roundtable. And the productivity roundtable has a big job ahead of it. Australia doesn't just have a productivity problem, it has a revenue problem. Australia is one of the lowest-taxing countries in the developed world. In fact, if Australia collected the OECD average in tax - not the highest amount, just the average - the Commonwealth would have had an extra $140 billion in revenue in 2023-24. To put that in perspective, it's equivalent to the combined cost of the aged pension, the NDIS, Jobseeker, and the child care subsidy, along with the total government spending on housing, vocational education, and both the ABC and SBS. It's clear that bold tax reforms are necessary. Despite being a low-tax country, Australia is still one of the richest countries on Earth. Yet many people's living standards have been going backwards. Why? Lots of reasons. The Coalition enacted policies that deliberately kept wages low. So, when excessive corporate profits drove inflation after the pandemic, the cost of everyday living rose faster than people's paychecks could keep up. Allowing multinational gas companies to export 80 per cent of Australia's gas tripled domestic gas prices and doubled wholesale electricity prices on the east coast of Australia. Climate change-fuelled extreme weather is driving up insurance costs and premiums. The cost of buying a house is now out of reach for most young people, and the cost of renting has skyrocketed, too. This is how most people experience an increase in inequality - your paycheck doesn't go as far as it used to. But those everyday cost-of-living increases obscure a larger truth about the Australian economy. It's just less fair than it used to be. It used to be that a rising tide lifted all boats. When the economy grew, Australians all shared the benefits. If you imagine Australian economic growth were a cake shared between 10 people, in the decades after World War II, the bottom 90 per cent of Australians used to get 9 pieces of cake, leaving one piece for the top 10 per cent. In the decade after the Global Financial Crisis, the richest person at the table ate nine pieces of cake, and the bottom 90 per cent of people shared less than one piece of cake between them. It's hugely unfair. There's not much point boosting productivity if a majority of working people don't get to share in the benefits. Treasurer Jim Chalmers is keen to have that debate. He described the game of ruling things in or out as "cancerous" and vowed to dial up Labor's ambition for bold reforms. And let's be clear, to reverse that path of Australia's growing inequality will require bold tax reforms. It's clear the Treasurer understands that, as well as several of the roundtable invitees, who want tax reform on the agenda at the productivity roundtable. The ACTU submission included several tax reforms, including to negative gearing and the CGT discount, but also reforming the broken Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (PRRT) and replacing it with a new 25 per cent export levy on gas. Negative gearing together with the CGT discount has so warped our housing market, many young Australians have given up on every owning their own home. But it looks like the PM has put off reforming those distortionary tax concessions until his next term of government. He keeps hosing down suggestions for progressive tax reforms. To hear the Prime Minister rule out any major tax reforms before the next election is not just disappointing, it's irresponsible. There are also reports that the government is considering introducing road user charges for electric vehicles only. If we're talking road user charges, it would make sense to include heavy vehicles, which do so much damage to our roads - a vehicle that's twice the weight of a regular vehicle does 16 times the damage to the road. But heavy vehicles don't pay anything extra for that damage. But will heavy vehicles be included in any new road user charges? Doesn't look like it. READ MORE EBONY BENNETT: The fact that Labor is considering slugging electric vehicle drivers with a new tax, while doing nothing to stop half of Australia's gas being exported royalty-free, tells you everything you need to know. Big tax reforms are on the table for electric vehicles, but off the table for the gas industry. Yet, according to the Treasury advice leaked to the ABC, the government will consider other major reforms. For example, it will weaken - sorry, "streamline" - our national environment laws to make development easier. And it will consider cutting "red tape" by freezing changes to the National Construction Code. Labor has a thumping majority in the lower house and it can pass progressive reforms through the Senate with the support of the Greens any time it wants. Instead, the government's productivity agenda seems to be to weaken environment laws, tax clean vehicles, cut red tape for property developers and leave the difficult tax reforms until after the next election. It's a far cry from Albanese's promise in Labor's election platform, to be a government "as courageous and hardworking and caring as the Australian people are themselves." Labor has never been in a better position to implement its national policy platform. But will the Albanese government spend the next three years using its thumping majority to lead bold reforms or deliver damp squib solutions? Next week's productivity roundtable will reveal which path the Prime Minister intends to tread, and so far, it looks like all it's set to do is weaken environment laws and delay big tax reforms until after the next election. Between the Treasury advice leaked to the ABC and the Prime Minister ruling out any major tax reforms before the next election, the government poured a bucket of cold water on any real excitement building for the productivity roundtable. And the productivity roundtable has a big job ahead of it. Australia doesn't just have a productivity problem, it has a revenue problem. Australia is one of the lowest-taxing countries in the developed world. In fact, if Australia collected the OECD average in tax - not the highest amount, just the average - the Commonwealth would have had an extra $140 billion in revenue in 2023-24. To put that in perspective, it's equivalent to the combined cost of the aged pension, the NDIS, Jobseeker, and the child care subsidy, along with the total government spending on housing, vocational education, and both the ABC and SBS. It's clear that bold tax reforms are necessary. Despite being a low-tax country, Australia is still one of the richest countries on Earth. Yet many people's living standards have been going backwards. Why? Lots of reasons. The Coalition enacted policies that deliberately kept wages low. So, when excessive corporate profits drove inflation after the pandemic, the cost of everyday living rose faster than people's paychecks could keep up. Allowing multinational gas companies to export 80 per cent of Australia's gas tripled domestic gas prices and doubled wholesale electricity prices on the east coast of Australia. Climate change-fuelled extreme weather is driving up insurance costs and premiums. The cost of buying a house is now out of reach for most young people, and the cost of renting has skyrocketed, too. This is how most people experience an increase in inequality - your paycheck doesn't go as far as it used to. But those everyday cost-of-living increases obscure a larger truth about the Australian economy. It's just less fair than it used to be. It used to be that a rising tide lifted all boats. When the economy grew, Australians all shared the benefits. If you imagine Australian economic growth were a cake shared between 10 people, in the decades after World War II, the bottom 90 per cent of Australians used to get 9 pieces of cake, leaving one piece for the top 10 per cent. In the decade after the Global Financial Crisis, the richest person at the table ate nine pieces of cake, and the bottom 90 per cent of people shared less than one piece of cake between them. It's hugely unfair. There's not much point boosting productivity if a majority of working people don't get to share in the benefits. Treasurer Jim Chalmers is keen to have that debate. He described the game of ruling things in or out as "cancerous" and vowed to dial up Labor's ambition for bold reforms. And let's be clear, to reverse that path of Australia's growing inequality will require bold tax reforms. It's clear the Treasurer understands that, as well as several of the roundtable invitees, who want tax reform on the agenda at the productivity roundtable. The ACTU submission included several tax reforms, including to negative gearing and the CGT discount, but also reforming the broken Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (PRRT) and replacing it with a new 25 per cent export levy on gas. Negative gearing together with the CGT discount has so warped our housing market, many young Australians have given up on every owning their own home. But it looks like the PM has put off reforming those distortionary tax concessions until his next term of government. He keeps hosing down suggestions for progressive tax reforms. To hear the Prime Minister rule out any major tax reforms before the next election is not just disappointing, it's irresponsible. There are also reports that the government is considering introducing road user charges for electric vehicles only. If we're talking road user charges, it would make sense to include heavy vehicles, which do so much damage to our roads - a vehicle that's twice the weight of a regular vehicle does 16 times the damage to the road. But heavy vehicles don't pay anything extra for that damage. But will heavy vehicles be included in any new road user charges? Doesn't look like it. READ MORE EBONY BENNETT: The fact that Labor is considering slugging electric vehicle drivers with a new tax, while doing nothing to stop half of Australia's gas being exported royalty-free, tells you everything you need to know. Big tax reforms are on the table for electric vehicles, but off the table for the gas industry. Yet, according to the Treasury advice leaked to the ABC, the government will consider other major reforms. For example, it will weaken - sorry, "streamline" - our national environment laws to make development easier. And it will consider cutting "red tape" by freezing changes to the National Construction Code. Labor has a thumping majority in the lower house and it can pass progressive reforms through the Senate with the support of the Greens any time it wants. Instead, the government's productivity agenda seems to be to weaken environment laws, tax clean vehicles, cut red tape for property developers and leave the difficult tax reforms until after the next election. It's a far cry from Albanese's promise in Labor's election platform, to be a government "as courageous and hardworking and caring as the Australian people are themselves."
Sydney Morning Herald
2 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Albanese's Palestinian recognition shows the world is now waiting on Trump
The United States' ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, wasn't about to repeat his private conversations with Donald Trump live on television. But he was happy to characterise what the US president and his administration thought about Australia's decision to recognise a Palestinian state this week. 'There's an enormous level of disappointment, and some disgust... This is a gift to them [Hamas], and it's unfortunate,' Huckabee told the ABC's 7.30 on Thursday night. 'The emotional sentiment [was] a sense of: You've got to be kidding. Why would they be doing this? And why would they be doing this now?' Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who had been dealing with a challenging domestic response to his government's decision since Monday, had answers on Friday morning, starting with a similar feeling. 'Australians have been disgusted by what they see on their TV every night. They were disgusted by the terrorist actions of Hamas on October 7, the slaughter of innocent Israelis,' he said on ABC radio. 'But Australians have also seen the death of tens of thousands of people. When you have children starving, when you have children losing their lives, with families queuing for food and water, then that provokes, not surprisingly, a human reaction.' Albanese's decision to follow France, the United Kingdom and Canada in declaring that Australia would recognise Palestine at the United Nations next month was, in part, a human reaction to suffering as striking images of hunger came out of Gaza. Pressure was bubbling inside the Labor caucus and, just the weekend before, more than 100,000 Australians marched in protest over the Sydney Harbour Bridge and on the streets of Melbourne. The prime minister's foreign policy shift was also pragmatic: once like-minded countries made the move, there was expectation that Albanese would add to global momentum. Loading But if Albanese expected warm feedback, it was not forthcoming. Before Huckabee took aim at Australia's decision, Israel had expressed its fury, Jewish Australian groups said they had been betrayed, and even prominent pro-Palestine advocates were lukewarm. The praise, when it burst onto newspaper front pages, was not from desired sources. Instead, senior officials from Hamas, the listed terrorist organisation that conducted the October 7 attacks, praised the prime minister's move, exposing Albanese to fierce criticism and accusations of naivety. Aaron David Miller, a Middle East analyst who worked on US negotiations to end the conflict for decades, doubts next month's meeting at the United Nations will lead to the outcome Western leaders are hoping for. He says a two-state solution remains the 'least-worst option' but the time is not right, given Hamas remains in power in Gaza and the far-right Netanyahu government leads Israel. 'The Australians have had no experience in this region. The British and the French have, and they should know that the Middle East is literally littered with the remains of great powers, their schemes, their dreams, their ambitions, their peace plans,' Miller says. 'I don't see any relationship between what's being done and the impact that it will have on the current situation, let alone on bringing anybody closer to a meaningful two-state solution... Why is it the right time? There's no logical, compelling explanation. This is being done for domestic political reasons or out of moral and ethical motivations.' But the Western nations, including Australia, say a deteriorating situation has added urgency to the two-state push. 'There is a risk there will be no Palestine left to recognise,' Wong said last week. On Friday, Israeli far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich raised the stakes: he announced that work will start on a long-delayed settlement to divide the West Bank and cut it off from East Jerusalem, a move his office said would 'bury' the idea of a Palestinian state. Loading 'Whoever in the world is trying to recognise a Palestinian state today will receive our answer on the ground. Not with documents nor with decisions or statements, but with facts. Facts of houses, facts of neighbourhoods,' he said. Smotrich, a settler himself, claimed Netanyahu and Trump had agreed to the development, although there was no immediate confirmation from either. The Albanese government started laying the groundwork for this week's announcement long before that threat. Foreign Minister Penny Wong started making the case for recognising Palestine as part of a two-state process – rather than at the end of one – back in April last year. Wong said recognition had always been a matter of 'when, not if'. As accusations of mass starvation were levelled at Israel in recent weeks, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu signalled a takeover of Gaza City, other nations made historic moves towards recognition. Then it became Australia's turn. 'We didn't want to be leading the pack, but we didn't want to be too slow either,' a government source told this masthead this week. Albanese said he was also reassured by recent commitments from the Palestinian Authority and Arab League. Still,backlash was swift. Israel's ambassador to Australia, Amir Maimon, said Albanese had abandoned his own conditions for recognition and would reward Hamas in the process. Netanyahu called it shameful. The Executive Council of Australian Jewry – who had been assured by the prime minister a fortnight earlier that recognition was not imminent – described it as a betrayal. Peter Moss, the co-convenor of Labor Friends of Palestine, said the move would be applauded by the party's rank-and-file as a 'historic milestone'. But a co-founder of the Labor Friends of Israel group, Nick Dyrenfurth, said some lifetime Jewish Labor members were considering quitting the party with a sense of despair. Even Nasser Mashni, the president of the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network, called the decision a 'cynical political smokescreen'. Many Palestinians and pro-Palestine advocates labelled recognition a distraction and instead urged the government to pursue sanctions, an arms embargo, and an end to trade with Israel. As the week continued, interjections from Hamas, a listed terrorist organisation, compounded the controversy. This masthead reported that the office of a Hamas co-founder, Hassan Yousef, applauded Australia's decision. Albanese warned media outlets not to report propaganda, and a statement issued in a Hamas telegram channel disavowed the comments attributed to Yousef, saying he was detained and cut off from the outside world. But two other senior Hamas officials soon made similar comments, calling Australia's move towards recognition a 'positive step towards the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people'. John Coyne, the national security director at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, says the complicated structure of Hamas and its leadership – now dispersed across the world, with diminished numbers in Palestine itself – made it difficult to interpret messages from the group. 'When you've got a global terrorist organisation, it's not like an elected government or public service bureaucracy. The term leadership is used very loosely,' he says. 'There are a number of senior figures and so of course, they'll all have their perspectives and at a time of chaos and change, people aspire to challenge the status quo and become the spokesperson.' But having warned Albanese over recent weeks that he was playing into Hamas' hands, the federal opposition jumped. 'Hamas is more than supporting the decision [Albanese] made, they are in full throated praise of it, they are cheering on, they are calling our Prime Minister a man of courage,' said opposition leader Sussan Ley. 'On a day when a terrorist organisation calls our Prime Minister a hero, surely he has to think about reversing the decision that led to that.' If Labor had envisioned a political win at the beginning of the week, Albanese did not show it. 'This decision is criticised by people on all sides of the debate. I expected that to be the case,' he said on the Today show on Tuesday. 'The people who are saying this is not the way forward... Ok, what's your plan? The plan of Prime Minister Netanyahu is just to continue: continue to push into Gaza, occupy Gaza City. How will that provide a resolution going forward to ongoing conflict that has been there for 77 years?' Most countries in the United Nations – 147 of 193 – already recognise Palestine. But commitments from Australia, France, the UK and Canada to recognise Palestine at a UN General Assembly meeting in New York next month add heft. Several European nations, including G20 members Italy and Germany, have not yet pledged to do so, nor have Japan and South Korea. New Zealand could be the next to add its voice, after conservative prime minister Chris Luxon this week said Netanyahu had 'lost the plot'. But analysts emphasise it is the United States that will ultimately determine whether a Palestinian state inches closer to reality or remains fantasy. 'At the end of the day, the international community can jump up and down as much as they want, but until the US agrees to accept the Palestinian admission into the UN general assembly … this concept of statehood is going to remain an idea,' says Shahram Akbarzadeh, a professor in Middle East politics at Deakin University. 'I don't see how a Trump administration could vote yes to Palestinian statehood ... I think we will see the continuation of Palestinian lives in limbo in terms of international law and international standing.' Amin Saikal, another expert, shares his scepticism. But he thinks Trump could be the wildcard that changes the trajectory of the Middle East. 'There are some elements within the MAGA movement that have called for a revision of American support for Israel,' he says, pointing to congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Green, and commentators Steve Bannon and Tucker Carlson. 'Trump does look at his base, and he does really take what comes out of MAGA quite seriously. At the same time, he is an unpredictable transactional leader.' Loading Trump threatened Canada's trade deal in response to its recognition of Palestine, only to walk the threat back. Before Huckabee gave his full-throttled criticism of Australia, the White House declined to weigh in, saying Trump was 'not married to any one solution'. The US president is a staunch ally of Netanyahu, but even he has lashed out at the Israeli prime minister, most recently by disputing Israel's claims of there being no starvation in Gaza. 'It may come to the point that you could see the widening of the rift between the United States and its allies is not really going to benefit the United States,' Saikal says. 'Therefore [Trump] may decide to soften his position, or put more pressure on the Israeli leadership to accept the reality of a two-state solution as inevitable and as the only one.'
