Latest news with #RegionalFutureFund
The Advertiser
21-05-2025
- Politics
- The Advertiser
The enmity is obvious in 'amicable' political split
This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to It's the election that refuses to die. Apart from a couple of seats still in the count, it seemed done and dusted. Time to move on, we all thought. Until yesterday, that is, when David Littleproud dropped a nuclear bomb and blew up the Coalition. A trial separation, he reassured us, to give the Liberal Party room for rediscovery, a chance to decide what it wanted to be, as it reeled from the worst election defeat in its history. Things were crook in the marriage. Rumblings lingered over Scott Morrison's net zero commitment, which the Nats hated. Peter Dutton had to go to the election with a commitment to divestiture powers over the supermarket duopoly as well a $20 billion Regional Future Fund, which no one really understood. All to keep the Nats happy. And then there was nuclear, a policy so unpopular it barely got a mention by the Libs in the entire campaign but was championed by the Nats - and still is. The nuclear policy fallout was a major factor in the falling out. The Nats want to stick with it; the Libs aren't so sure. The Nationals are keen to point to the three previous trial separations in the Coalition, all of which were patched up. The last one happened in 1987 and led to the disastrous Joh for PM push, which helped ensure Labor remained in government for years. Dressed up as an amicable split, there were obvious hints of resentment over the terrible election loss. Former leader Michael McCormack questioned whether his city cousins in the Liberal Party had the same work ethic as the Nationals. He took a swipe at the senior coalition ex-partner's lack of discipline and the habit of some of its MPs anonymously backgrounding journalists. And there was a barely veiled note of scorn for Jacinta Price, the senator who defected to the Libs just after the election. "There's only one position that Jacinta Nampijinpa Price could gain being a member of the Liberal Party that she couldn't gain being a member of the National Party and that is the prime minister's job," he said in media conference in Wagga Wagga. "I wasn't being disrespectful. I like Jacinta but she's a long way off the prime minister. First of all, she's in the upper house, second of all, she's in opposition." If that was amity, enmity wasn't far behind. So where does this leave the opposition? We now have two rural and regional-based parties because the Liberals were all but banished from the capital cities. One is looking at what went wrong and in electing moderates to its leadership is tacking back to the centre of politics. The other, which held on to its seats, is staying its course to the right. Because they hold more seats in the lower house, the Liberals will still be the main opposition party, with the Nationals playing a bit part. In walking away from the Coalition, they've made themselves less relevant, which is an odd decision politically but probably only temporary. As Michael McCormack conceded yesterday, with only 15 seats, the Nationals have less than a snowflake's chance of ever governing in their own right. If they are to ever to sit on the government benches again, they'll have to get back into bed with the Liberals. That's the reality that will dawn on them over the next three years. HAVE YOUR SAY: Will the National Party condemn itself to irrelevance by walking away from the coalition with the Liberal Party? Will it now become a fringe right-wing party? How important is a functioning and credible opposition to Australian politics? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - The official cash rate has fallen below 4 per cent for the first time in two years, after the central bank decided on a cut at its May board meeting. The Reserve Bank board announced a 25 basis point reduction to the official cash rate, taking it to 3.85 per cent. - An apology by Qantas for sacking 1820 ground crew rings "wholly hollow" and it has failed to make changes that ensure such actions never happen again, a judge has been told. - If it's good enough for city children to wear seatbelts on school buses, it's good enough for rural kids, too. That's what has been put forward at the Country Women's Association of NSW state conference in Wagga. THEY SAID IT: "A divorce is like an amputation: you survive it, but there's less of you." - Margaret Atwood YOU SAID IT: After intense international pressure Israel has agreed to allow six trucks of vital aid into Gaza. Aid agencies say at least 600 trucks a day are needed to feed the war-weary population. Yet Israel denies it is using starvation as a weapon of war. "Love Peter's cartoon," writes Sue. "Spot on, John. Two wrongs don't make a right. The situation has never been a good one and is an excellent argument against the way Israel was established in the first place. The idea of establishing a homeland for the Jews after World War II was excellent, but the manner was not. No country is going to be happy to have outsiders give, without reference to them, part of their land to other people, particularly a group of people they have ideological and traditional differences with. Don't ask me what the answer is, but the destruction of Gaza will only lead to further problems." Tony writes: "It certainly looks like the government of Israel is using starvation as a weapon." "Most people are repelled at the tactics used by the IDF, just as they were appalled by the Holocaust," writes Anita. "Any goodwill remaining after World War II (and there was much), would have dissipated by now and blame would have generalised from the specific, Netanyahu, to the IDF, to the people of Israel. It will take generations for memories to fade. I know of Jewish people who are campaigning against these actions because they have a heart. Australia needs to join the chorus of right-thinking people across the globe decrying this atrocity." Patricia writes: "Of course Israel is using starvation as a weapon of war. This has been happening for some time. This is a war crime. While some countries, like Ireland, have been calling out the genocide since it became apparent, our government doesn't. I'm told, by Labor supporters and politicians, of the many things Labor has done. But they are far too little, far too late. Labor is in thrall to the Israel lobby. I was writing to my representatives before the election, however their responses are pathetic. Meanwhile, Albanese is promising more aid to Ukraine. I used to be rusted on Labor - never again. I put them as far down the line as possible in the recent election. Never again. I can't help but notice: Ukrainians = white. Palestinians = brown. Is this racism?" "John's words evoke an image which few of us can stomach," writes Murray. "The deliberate starvation of Palestinians, especially children. There is no way it can be argued that what is happening is not being done deliberately to weaken them. And yet, If Palestinian Hamas and supporting neighbours were allowed to build sufficient strength they would overrun Israel, and the starvation of children would be one of the lesser atrocities. Two wrongs never make a right, that is true. But willfully letting control of a situation slip away, when the survival of your nation is at stake, that would be unforgivable. Israel is fighting for its existence. And keyboard commentators are condemning them." Sue K writes: "If the USA found Israel's invasion of Gaza unacceptable, all they have to do is stop supplying Israel with the weapons to fight the war. Then we might find Netanyahu notices what the rest of the world is shouting at him. Until then, the situation is hopeless." "I have been a lifelong supporter of Israel until now," writes Terry R. "Irrespective of the provocation, which was substantial, the religious ratbags now on charge of Israel will be its destruction. Yes I mean destruction. I cannot see Israel ever recovering from the immense damage this team of crooks have done to its reputation. Something must be done to prevent total starvation in Gaza. I hear the arguments put forward by Israel's supporters. They ignore the truth. Sure something must be done to ensure Israel's future is peaceful and free from terrorism. But they must stop the terrorism they are perpetrating now. And I mean now." Phil writes: "Of all the peoples in the world, I would expect the Jewish people to most easily recognise and recoil from crimes against humanity, such as destruction of homes, dispossession of property, group punishment for resistance, starvation, dehumanisation, summary incarceration and executions, systematic extermination of journalists and health workers, and genocide. The fact that these crimes, so redolent of the Nazi's 'final solution', are being committed against Palestinians, wholesale, by Jews, beggars belief. The failure of the rest of the world to stop it is egregiously tragic." "Netanyahu will not stop until Gaza is razed to the ground to make it uninhabitable," writes Sharon. "The West Bank is undergoing the same process. If you criticise the Israeli government you are accused of anti-Semitism. No, dear, I'm anti-war." Bill writes: "While Bibi [Netanyahu] wants to remain in power with the support of right-wing religious extremists, and avoid the resumption of a long-pending corruption court hearing, hospitals in Gaza will be bombed and its citizens will starve. The IDF could spend the next decade advancing up Gaza, only to turn around again and go south, eliminating more of the population on each march. Hamas knows this, which is why they still retain hostages. If Bibi declares peace in Gaza, his government will collapse. He will face court. And an enquiry as to how the famed Israel security system was caught with their pants down. Bibi will keep going, regardless of proposed Euro sanctions, until Trump withdraws support in terms of weapons and the USA Jewish diaspora stops funding Bibi. And Bibi is on record opposing the two-state solution, as will all the illegal squatters/settlers in occupied land." "Yes, Israel is using starvation as a weapon of war and it doesn't matter what the US or the UK-based lawyers think or how often Israel protest their innocence - the majority of the world's nations are appalled by their actions," writes Jeanette. "There is little difference between Netanyahu and people like Lenin, Stalin, Mao and others who used mass starvation as a weapon of destruction." Arthur writes: "There can be no doubt that Israel is using starvation as a weapon of war. Hamas does not care for the Palestinians and is just as responsible. Hamas is winning the war but not the battle. Hamas is letting Israel lose its world standing and thus lose the war. Israel is just blind to the realities. A two-state solution is the only glimmer of hope and eventually Israel will have to agree and start to obey international law." "Is Israel using starvation as a weapon of war? It's not even a question," writes Marilyn. "The evidence is there for all to see. I was reminded of the international standing Israel once had as I finished reading Maria van Lieshout's Song of a Blackbird yesterday. She describes the courage, compassion and resistance by the Dutch during World War II, so that Jewish people might be spared the ravages of the Nazis. One might think that those qualities would in turn be exhibited by Jewish people to others in recognition of sacrifices that many made towards the Jews in that era. That Western nations have barely begun to exercise their voices and possibly enact actions against Israel is beyond the comprehension of people with long memories." Bernard writes: "Thank you for this newsletter. Hamas may be a terrorist organisation, but Israel has become a terrorising state to the people of Gaza! Given the support Netanyahu gave Hamas to keep Gaza and the West bank divided, we can understand some of the murderous brutality he displays towards the group that assaulted Israel, but not the disproportionate killing of Palestinians. Albanese has asked us not to bring overseas conflicts to Australia, but we allow Australian/Israeli citizens to visit Israel and perform military service. And return to Australia! Since October 2023 how many 'Ausraelis' have departed Australia and performed military service in Israel? Allowing this migration is surely a case of Australia supporting the acts of genocide against Gazans!" This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to It's the election that refuses to die. Apart from a couple of seats still in the count, it seemed done and dusted. Time to move on, we all thought. Until yesterday, that is, when David Littleproud dropped a nuclear bomb and blew up the Coalition. A trial separation, he reassured us, to give the Liberal Party room for rediscovery, a chance to decide what it wanted to be, as it reeled from the worst election defeat in its history. Things were crook in the marriage. Rumblings lingered over Scott Morrison's net zero commitment, which the Nats hated. Peter Dutton had to go to the election with a commitment to divestiture powers over the supermarket duopoly as well a $20 billion Regional Future Fund, which no one really understood. All to keep the Nats happy. And then there was nuclear, a policy so unpopular it barely got a mention by the Libs in the entire campaign but was championed by the Nats - and still is. The nuclear policy fallout was a major factor in the falling out. The Nats want to stick with it; the Libs aren't so sure. The Nationals are keen to point to the three previous trial separations in the Coalition, all of which were patched up. The last one happened in 1987 and led to the disastrous Joh for PM push, which helped ensure Labor remained in government for years. Dressed up as an amicable split, there were obvious hints of resentment over the terrible election loss. Former leader Michael McCormack questioned whether his city cousins in the Liberal Party had the same work ethic as the Nationals. He took a swipe at the senior coalition ex-partner's lack of discipline and the habit of some of its MPs anonymously backgrounding journalists. And there was a barely veiled note of scorn for Jacinta Price, the senator who defected to the Libs just after the election. "There's only one position that Jacinta Nampijinpa Price could gain being a member of the Liberal Party that she couldn't gain being a member of the National Party and that is the prime minister's job," he said in media conference in Wagga Wagga. "I wasn't being disrespectful. I like Jacinta but she's a long way off the prime minister. First of all, she's in the upper house, second of all, she's in opposition." If that was amity, enmity wasn't far behind. So where does this leave the opposition? We now have two rural and regional-based parties because the Liberals were all but banished from the capital cities. One is looking at what went wrong and in electing moderates to its leadership is tacking back to the centre of politics. The other, which held on to its seats, is staying its course to the right. Because they hold more seats in the lower house, the Liberals will still be the main opposition party, with the Nationals playing a bit part. In walking away from the Coalition, they've made themselves less relevant, which is an odd decision politically but probably only temporary. As Michael McCormack conceded yesterday, with only 15 seats, the Nationals have less than a snowflake's chance of ever governing in their own right. If they are to ever to sit on the government benches again, they'll have to get back into bed with the Liberals. That's the reality that will dawn on them over the next three years. HAVE YOUR SAY: Will the National Party condemn itself to irrelevance by walking away from the coalition with the Liberal Party? Will it now become a fringe right-wing party? How important is a functioning and credible opposition to Australian politics? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - The official cash rate has fallen below 4 per cent for the first time in two years, after the central bank decided on a cut at its May board meeting. The Reserve Bank board announced a 25 basis point reduction to the official cash rate, taking it to 3.85 per cent. - An apology by Qantas for sacking 1820 ground crew rings "wholly hollow" and it has failed to make changes that ensure such actions never happen again, a judge has been told. - If it's good enough for city children to wear seatbelts on school buses, it's good enough for rural kids, too. That's what has been put forward at the Country Women's Association of NSW state conference in Wagga. THEY SAID IT: "A divorce is like an amputation: you survive it, but there's less of you." - Margaret Atwood YOU SAID IT: After intense international pressure Israel has agreed to allow six trucks of vital aid into Gaza. Aid agencies say at least 600 trucks a day are needed to feed the war-weary population. Yet Israel denies it is using starvation as a weapon of war. "Love Peter's cartoon," writes Sue. "Spot on, John. Two wrongs don't make a right. The situation has never been a good one and is an excellent argument against the way Israel was established in the first place. The idea of establishing a homeland for the Jews after World War II was excellent, but the manner was not. No country is going to be happy to have outsiders give, without reference to them, part of their land to other people, particularly a group of people they have ideological and traditional differences with. Don't ask me what the answer is, but the destruction of Gaza will only lead to further problems." Tony writes: "It certainly looks like the government of Israel is using starvation as a weapon." "Most people are repelled at the tactics used by the IDF, just as they were appalled by the Holocaust," writes Anita. "Any goodwill remaining after World War II (and there was much), would have dissipated by now and blame would have generalised from the specific, Netanyahu, to the IDF, to the people of Israel. It will take generations for memories to fade. I know of Jewish people who are campaigning against these actions because they have a heart. Australia needs to join the chorus of right-thinking people across the globe decrying this atrocity." Patricia writes: "Of course Israel is using starvation as a weapon of war. This has been happening for some time. This is a war crime. While some countries, like Ireland, have been calling out the genocide since it became apparent, our government doesn't. I'm told, by Labor supporters and politicians, of the many things Labor has done. But they are far too little, far too late. Labor is in thrall to the Israel lobby. I was writing to my representatives before the election, however their responses are pathetic. Meanwhile, Albanese is promising more aid to Ukraine. I used to be rusted on Labor - never again. I put them as far down the line as possible in the recent election. Never again. I can't help but notice: Ukrainians = white. Palestinians = brown. Is this racism?" "John's words evoke an image which few of us can stomach," writes Murray. "The deliberate starvation of Palestinians, especially children. There is no way it can be argued that what is happening is not being done deliberately to weaken them. And yet, If Palestinian Hamas and supporting neighbours were allowed to build sufficient strength they would overrun Israel, and the starvation of children would be one of the lesser atrocities. Two wrongs never make a right, that is true. But willfully letting control of a situation slip away, when the survival of your nation is at stake, that would be unforgivable. Israel is fighting for its existence. And keyboard commentators are condemning them." Sue K writes: "If the USA found Israel's invasion of Gaza unacceptable, all they have to do is stop supplying Israel with the weapons to fight the war. Then we might find Netanyahu notices what the rest of the world is shouting at him. Until then, the situation is hopeless." "I have been a lifelong supporter of Israel until now," writes Terry R. "Irrespective of the provocation, which was substantial, the religious ratbags now on charge of Israel will be its destruction. Yes I mean destruction. I cannot see Israel ever recovering from the immense damage this team of crooks have done to its reputation. Something must be done to prevent total starvation in Gaza. I hear the arguments put forward by Israel's supporters. They ignore the truth. Sure something must be done to ensure Israel's future is peaceful and free from terrorism. But they must stop the terrorism they are perpetrating now. And I mean now." Phil writes: "Of all the peoples in the world, I would expect the Jewish people to most easily recognise and recoil from crimes against humanity, such as destruction of homes, dispossession of property, group punishment for resistance, starvation, dehumanisation, summary incarceration and executions, systematic extermination of journalists and health workers, and genocide. The fact that these crimes, so redolent of the Nazi's 'final solution', are being committed against Palestinians, wholesale, by Jews, beggars belief. The failure of the rest of the world to stop it is egregiously tragic." "Netanyahu will not stop until Gaza is razed to the ground to make it uninhabitable," writes Sharon. "The West Bank is undergoing the same process. If you criticise the Israeli government you are accused of anti-Semitism. No, dear, I'm anti-war." Bill writes: "While Bibi [Netanyahu] wants to remain in power with the support of right-wing religious extremists, and avoid the resumption of a long-pending corruption court hearing, hospitals in Gaza will be bombed and its citizens will starve. The IDF could spend the next decade advancing up Gaza, only to turn around again and go south, eliminating more of the population on each march. Hamas knows this, which is why they still retain hostages. If Bibi declares peace in Gaza, his government will collapse. He will face court. And an enquiry as to how the famed Israel security system was caught with their pants down. Bibi will keep going, regardless of proposed Euro sanctions, until Trump withdraws support in terms of weapons and the USA Jewish diaspora stops funding Bibi. And Bibi is on record opposing the two-state solution, as will all the illegal squatters/settlers in occupied land." "Yes, Israel is using starvation as a weapon of war and it doesn't matter what the US or the UK-based lawyers think or how often Israel protest their innocence - the majority of the world's nations are appalled by their actions," writes Jeanette. "There is little difference between Netanyahu and people like Lenin, Stalin, Mao and others who used mass starvation as a weapon of destruction." Arthur writes: "There can be no doubt that Israel is using starvation as a weapon of war. Hamas does not care for the Palestinians and is just as responsible. Hamas is winning the war but not the battle. Hamas is letting Israel lose its world standing and thus lose the war. Israel is just blind to the realities. A two-state solution is the only glimmer of hope and eventually Israel will have to agree and start to obey international law." "Is Israel using starvation as a weapon of war? It's not even a question," writes Marilyn. "The evidence is there for all to see. I was reminded of the international standing Israel once had as I finished reading Maria van Lieshout's Song of a Blackbird yesterday. She describes the courage, compassion and resistance by the Dutch during World War II, so that Jewish people might be spared the ravages of the Nazis. One might think that those qualities would in turn be exhibited by Jewish people to others in recognition of sacrifices that many made towards the Jews in that era. That Western nations have barely begun to exercise their voices and possibly enact actions against Israel is beyond the comprehension of people with long memories." Bernard writes: "Thank you for this newsletter. Hamas may be a terrorist organisation, but Israel has become a terrorising state to the people of Gaza! Given the support Netanyahu gave Hamas to keep Gaza and the West bank divided, we can understand some of the murderous brutality he displays towards the group that assaulted Israel, but not the disproportionate killing of Palestinians. Albanese has asked us not to bring overseas conflicts to Australia, but we allow Australian/Israeli citizens to visit Israel and perform military service. And return to Australia! Since October 2023 how many 'Ausraelis' have departed Australia and performed military service in Israel? Allowing this migration is surely a case of Australia supporting the acts of genocide against Gazans!" This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to It's the election that refuses to die. Apart from a couple of seats still in the count, it seemed done and dusted. Time to move on, we all thought. Until yesterday, that is, when David Littleproud dropped a nuclear bomb and blew up the Coalition. A trial separation, he reassured us, to give the Liberal Party room for rediscovery, a chance to decide what it wanted to be, as it reeled from the worst election defeat in its history. Things were crook in the marriage. Rumblings lingered over Scott Morrison's net zero commitment, which the Nats hated. Peter Dutton had to go to the election with a commitment to divestiture powers over the supermarket duopoly as well a $20 billion Regional Future Fund, which no one really understood. All to keep the Nats happy. And then there was nuclear, a policy so unpopular it barely got a mention by the Libs in the entire campaign but was championed by the Nats - and still is. The nuclear policy fallout was a major factor in the falling out. The Nats want to stick with it; the Libs aren't so sure. The Nationals are keen to point to the three previous trial separations in the Coalition, all of which were patched up. The last one happened in 1987 and led to the disastrous Joh for PM push, which helped ensure Labor remained in government for years. Dressed up as an amicable split, there were obvious hints of resentment over the terrible election loss. Former leader Michael McCormack questioned whether his city cousins in the Liberal Party had the same work ethic as the Nationals. He took a swipe at the senior coalition ex-partner's lack of discipline and the habit of some of its MPs anonymously backgrounding journalists. And there was a barely veiled note of scorn for Jacinta Price, the senator who defected to the Libs just after the election. "There's only one position that Jacinta Nampijinpa Price could gain being a member of the Liberal Party that she couldn't gain being a member of the National Party and that is the prime minister's job," he said in media conference in Wagga Wagga. "I wasn't being disrespectful. I like Jacinta but she's a long way off the prime minister. First of all, she's in the upper house, second of all, she's in opposition." If that was amity, enmity wasn't far behind. So where does this leave the opposition? We now have two rural and regional-based parties because the Liberals were all but banished from the capital cities. One is looking at what went wrong and in electing moderates to its leadership is tacking back to the centre of politics. The other, which held on to its seats, is staying its course to the right. Because they hold more seats in the lower house, the Liberals will still be the main opposition party, with the Nationals playing a bit part. In walking away from the Coalition, they've made themselves less relevant, which is an odd decision politically but probably only temporary. As Michael McCormack conceded yesterday, with only 15 seats, the Nationals have less than a snowflake's chance of ever governing in their own right. If they are to ever to sit on the government benches again, they'll have to get back into bed with the Liberals. That's the reality that will dawn on them over the next three years. HAVE YOUR SAY: Will the National Party condemn itself to irrelevance by walking away from the coalition with the Liberal Party? Will it now become a fringe right-wing party? How important is a functioning and credible opposition to Australian politics? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - The official cash rate has fallen below 4 per cent for the first time in two years, after the central bank decided on a cut at its May board meeting. The Reserve Bank board announced a 25 basis point reduction to the official cash rate, taking it to 3.85 per cent. - An apology by Qantas for sacking 1820 ground crew rings "wholly hollow" and it has failed to make changes that ensure such actions never happen again, a judge has been told. - If it's good enough for city children to wear seatbelts on school buses, it's good enough for rural kids, too. That's what has been put forward at the Country Women's Association of NSW state conference in Wagga. THEY SAID IT: "A divorce is like an amputation: you survive it, but there's less of you." - Margaret Atwood YOU SAID IT: After intense international pressure Israel has agreed to allow six trucks of vital aid into Gaza. Aid agencies say at least 600 trucks a day are needed to feed the war-weary population. Yet Israel denies it is using starvation as a weapon of war. "Love Peter's cartoon," writes Sue. "Spot on, John. Two wrongs don't make a right. The situation has never been a good one and is an excellent argument against the way Israel was established in the first place. The idea of establishing a homeland for the Jews after World War II was excellent, but the manner was not. No country is going to be happy to have outsiders give, without reference to them, part of their land to other people, particularly a group of people they have ideological and traditional differences with. Don't ask me what the answer is, but the destruction of Gaza will only lead to further problems." Tony writes: "It certainly looks like the government of Israel is using starvation as a weapon." "Most people are repelled at the tactics used by the IDF, just as they were appalled by the Holocaust," writes Anita. "Any goodwill remaining after World War II (and there was much), would have dissipated by now and blame would have generalised from the specific, Netanyahu, to the IDF, to the people of Israel. It will take generations for memories to fade. I know of Jewish people who are campaigning against these actions because they have a heart. Australia needs to join the chorus of right-thinking people across the globe decrying this atrocity." Patricia writes: "Of course Israel is using starvation as a weapon of war. This has been happening for some time. This is a war crime. While some countries, like Ireland, have been calling out the genocide since it became apparent, our government doesn't. I'm told, by Labor supporters and politicians, of the many things Labor has done. But they are far too little, far too late. Labor is in thrall to the Israel lobby. I was writing to my representatives before the election, however their responses are pathetic. Meanwhile, Albanese is promising more aid to Ukraine. I used to be rusted on Labor - never again. I put them as far down the line as possible in the recent election. Never again. I can't help but notice: Ukrainians = white. Palestinians = brown. Is this racism?" "John's words evoke an image which few of us can stomach," writes Murray. "The deliberate starvation of Palestinians, especially children. There is no way it can be argued that what is happening is not being done deliberately to weaken them. And yet, If Palestinian Hamas and supporting neighbours were allowed to build sufficient strength they would overrun Israel, and the starvation of children would be one of the lesser atrocities. Two wrongs never make a right, that is true. But willfully letting control of a situation slip away, when the survival of your nation is at stake, that would be unforgivable. Israel is fighting for its existence. And keyboard commentators are condemning them." Sue K writes: "If the USA found Israel's invasion of Gaza unacceptable, all they have to do is stop supplying Israel with the weapons to fight the war. Then we might find Netanyahu notices what the rest of the world is shouting at him. Until then, the situation is hopeless." "I have been a lifelong supporter of Israel until now," writes Terry R. "Irrespective of the provocation, which was substantial, the religious ratbags now on charge of Israel will be its destruction. Yes I mean destruction. I cannot see Israel ever recovering from the immense damage this team of crooks have done to its reputation. Something must be done to prevent total starvation in Gaza. I hear the arguments put forward by Israel's supporters. They ignore the truth. Sure something must be done to ensure Israel's future is peaceful and free from terrorism. But they must stop the terrorism they are perpetrating now. And I mean now." Phil writes: "Of all the peoples in the world, I would expect the Jewish people to most easily recognise and recoil from crimes against humanity, such as destruction of homes, dispossession of property, group punishment for resistance, starvation, dehumanisation, summary incarceration and executions, systematic extermination of journalists and health workers, and genocide. The fact that these crimes, so redolent of the Nazi's 'final solution', are being committed against Palestinians, wholesale, by Jews, beggars belief. The failure of the rest of the world to stop it is egregiously tragic." "Netanyahu will not stop until Gaza is razed to the ground to make it uninhabitable," writes Sharon. "The West Bank is undergoing the same process. If you criticise the Israeli government you are accused of anti-Semitism. No, dear, I'm anti-war." Bill writes: "While Bibi [Netanyahu] wants to remain in power with the support of right-wing religious extremists, and avoid the resumption of a long-pending corruption court hearing, hospitals in Gaza will be bombed and its citizens will starve. The IDF could spend the next decade advancing up Gaza, only to turn around again and go south, eliminating more of the population on each march. Hamas knows this, which is why they still retain hostages. If Bibi declares peace in Gaza, his government will collapse. He will face court. And an enquiry as to how the famed Israel security system was caught with their pants down. Bibi will keep going, regardless of proposed Euro sanctions, until Trump withdraws support in terms of weapons and the USA Jewish diaspora stops funding Bibi. And Bibi is on record opposing the two-state solution, as will all the illegal squatters/settlers in occupied land." "Yes, Israel is using starvation as a weapon of war and it doesn't matter what the US or the UK-based lawyers think or how often Israel protest their innocence - the majority of the world's nations are appalled by their actions," writes Jeanette. "There is little difference between Netanyahu and people like Lenin, Stalin, Mao and others who used mass starvation as a weapon of destruction." Arthur writes: "There can be no doubt that Israel is using starvation as a weapon of war. Hamas does not care for the Palestinians and is just as responsible. Hamas is winning the war but not the battle. Hamas is letting Israel lose its world standing and thus lose the war. Israel is just blind to the realities. A two-state solution is the only glimmer of hope and eventually Israel will have to agree and start to obey international law." "Is Israel using starvation as a weapon of war? It's not even a question," writes Marilyn. "The evidence is there for all to see. I was reminded of the international standing Israel once had as I finished reading Maria van Lieshout's Song of a Blackbird yesterday. She describes the courage, compassion and resistance by the Dutch during World War II, so that Jewish people might be spared the ravages of the Nazis. One might think that those qualities would in turn be exhibited by Jewish people to others in recognition of sacrifices that many made towards the Jews in that era. That Western nations have barely begun to exercise their voices and possibly enact actions against Israel is beyond the comprehension of people with long memories." Bernard writes: "Thank you for this newsletter. Hamas may be a terrorist organisation, but Israel has become a terrorising state to the people of Gaza! Given the support Netanyahu gave Hamas to keep Gaza and the West bank divided, we can understand some of the murderous brutality he displays towards the group that assaulted Israel, but not the disproportionate killing of Palestinians. Albanese has asked us not to bring overseas conflicts to Australia, but we allow Australian/Israeli citizens to visit Israel and perform military service. And return to Australia! Since October 2023 how many 'Ausraelis' have departed Australia and performed military service in Israel? Allowing this migration is surely a case of Australia supporting the acts of genocide against Gazans!" This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to It's the election that refuses to die. Apart from a couple of seats still in the count, it seemed done and dusted. Time to move on, we all thought. Until yesterday, that is, when David Littleproud dropped a nuclear bomb and blew up the Coalition. A trial separation, he reassured us, to give the Liberal Party room for rediscovery, a chance to decide what it wanted to be, as it reeled from the worst election defeat in its history. Things were crook in the marriage. Rumblings lingered over Scott Morrison's net zero commitment, which the Nats hated. Peter Dutton had to go to the election with a commitment to divestiture powers over the supermarket duopoly as well a $20 billion Regional Future Fund, which no one really understood. All to keep the Nats happy. And then there was nuclear, a policy so unpopular it barely got a mention by the Libs in the entire campaign but was championed by the Nats - and still is. The nuclear policy fallout was a major factor in the falling out. The Nats want to stick with it; the Libs aren't so sure. The Nationals are keen to point to the three previous trial separations in the Coalition, all of which were patched up. The last one happened in 1987 and led to the disastrous Joh for PM push, which helped ensure Labor remained in government for years. Dressed up as an amicable split, there were obvious hints of resentment over the terrible election loss. Former leader Michael McCormack questioned whether his city cousins in the Liberal Party had the same work ethic as the Nationals. He took a swipe at the senior coalition ex-partner's lack of discipline and the habit of some of its MPs anonymously backgrounding journalists. And there was a barely veiled note of scorn for Jacinta Price, the senator who defected to the Libs just after the election. "There's only one position that Jacinta Nampijinpa Price could gain being a member of the Liberal Party that she couldn't gain being a member of the National Party and that is the prime minister's job," he said in media conference in Wagga Wagga. "I wasn't being disrespectful. I like Jacinta but she's a long way off the prime minister. First of all, she's in the upper house, second of all, she's in opposition." If that was amity, enmity wasn't far behind. So where does this leave the opposition? We now have two rural and regional-based parties because the Liberals were all but banished from the capital cities. One is looking at what went wrong and in electing moderates to its leadership is tacking back to the centre of politics. The other, which held on to its seats, is staying its course to the right. Because they hold more seats in the lower house, the Liberals will still be the main opposition party, with the Nationals playing a bit part. In walking away from the Coalition, they've made themselves less relevant, which is an odd decision politically but probably only temporary. As Michael McCormack conceded yesterday, with only 15 seats, the Nationals have less than a snowflake's chance of ever governing in their own right. If they are to ever to sit on the government benches again, they'll have to get back into bed with the Liberals. That's the reality that will dawn on them over the next three years. HAVE YOUR SAY: Will the National Party condemn itself to irrelevance by walking away from the coalition with the Liberal Party? Will it now become a fringe right-wing party? How important is a functioning and credible opposition to Australian politics? Email us: echidna@ SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too. IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: - The official cash rate has fallen below 4 per cent for the first time in two years, after the central bank decided on a cut at its May board meeting. The Reserve Bank board announced a 25 basis point reduction to the official cash rate, taking it to 3.85 per cent. - An apology by Qantas for sacking 1820 ground crew rings "wholly hollow" and it has failed to make changes that ensure such actions never happen again, a judge has been told. - If it's good enough for city children to wear seatbelts on school buses, it's good enough for rural kids, too. That's what has been put forward at the Country Women's Association of NSW state conference in Wagga. THEY SAID IT: "A divorce is like an amputation: you survive it, but there's less of you." - Margaret Atwood YOU SAID IT: After intense international pressure Israel has agreed to allow six trucks of vital aid into Gaza. Aid agencies say at least 600 trucks a day are needed to feed the war-weary population. Yet Israel denies it is using starvation as a weapon of war. "Love Peter's cartoon," writes Sue. "Spot on, John. Two wrongs don't make a right. The situation has never been a good one and is an excellent argument against the way Israel was established in the first place. The idea of establishing a homeland for the Jews after World War II was excellent, but the manner was not. No country is going to be happy to have outsiders give, without reference to them, part of their land to other people, particularly a group of people they have ideological and traditional differences with. Don't ask me what the answer is, but the destruction of Gaza will only lead to further problems." Tony writes: "It certainly looks like the government of Israel is using starvation as a weapon." "Most people are repelled at the tactics used by the IDF, just as they were appalled by the Holocaust," writes Anita. "Any goodwill remaining after World War II (and there was much), would have dissipated by now and blame would have generalised from the specific, Netanyahu, to the IDF, to the people of Israel. It will take generations for memories to fade. I know of Jewish people who are campaigning against these actions because they have a heart. Australia needs to join the chorus of right-thinking people across the globe decrying this atrocity." Patricia writes: "Of course Israel is using starvation as a weapon of war. This has been happening for some time. This is a war crime. While some countries, like Ireland, have been calling out the genocide since it became apparent, our government doesn't. I'm told, by Labor supporters and politicians, of the many things Labor has done. But they are far too little, far too late. Labor is in thrall to the Israel lobby. I was writing to my representatives before the election, however their responses are pathetic. Meanwhile, Albanese is promising more aid to Ukraine. I used to be rusted on Labor - never again. I put them as far down the line as possible in the recent election. Never again. I can't help but notice: Ukrainians = white. Palestinians = brown. Is this racism?" "John's words evoke an image which few of us can stomach," writes Murray. "The deliberate starvation of Palestinians, especially children. There is no way it can be argued that what is happening is not being done deliberately to weaken them. And yet, If Palestinian Hamas and supporting neighbours were allowed to build sufficient strength they would overrun Israel, and the starvation of children would be one of the lesser atrocities. Two wrongs never make a right, that is true. But willfully letting control of a situation slip away, when the survival of your nation is at stake, that would be unforgivable. Israel is fighting for its existence. And keyboard commentators are condemning them." Sue K writes: "If the USA found Israel's invasion of Gaza unacceptable, all they have to do is stop supplying Israel with the weapons to fight the war. Then we might find Netanyahu notices what the rest of the world is shouting at him. Until then, the situation is hopeless." "I have been a lifelong supporter of Israel until now," writes Terry R. "Irrespective of the provocation, which was substantial, the religious ratbags now on charge of Israel will be its destruction. Yes I mean destruction. I cannot see Israel ever recovering from the immense damage this team of crooks have done to its reputation. Something must be done to prevent total starvation in Gaza. I hear the arguments put forward by Israel's supporters. They ignore the truth. Sure something must be done to ensure Israel's future is peaceful and free from terrorism. But they must stop the terrorism they are perpetrating now. And I mean now." Phil writes: "Of all the peoples in the world, I would expect the Jewish people to most easily recognise and recoil from crimes against humanity, such as destruction of homes, dispossession of property, group punishment for resistance, starvation, dehumanisation, summary incarceration and executions, systematic extermination of journalists and health workers, and genocide. The fact that these crimes, so redolent of the Nazi's 'final solution', are being committed against Palestinians, wholesale, by Jews, beggars belief. The failure of the rest of the world to stop it is egregiously tragic." "Netanyahu will not stop until Gaza is razed to the ground to make it uninhabitable," writes Sharon. "The West Bank is undergoing the same process. If you criticise the Israeli government you are accused of anti-Semitism. No, dear, I'm anti-war." Bill writes: "While Bibi [Netanyahu] wants to remain in power with the support of right-wing religious extremists, and avoid the resumption of a long-pending corruption court hearing, hospitals in Gaza will be bombed and its citizens will starve. The IDF could spend the next decade advancing up Gaza, only to turn around again and go south, eliminating more of the population on each march. Hamas knows this, which is why they still retain hostages. If Bibi declares peace in Gaza, his government will collapse. He will face court. And an enquiry as to how the famed Israel security system was caught with their pants down. Bibi will keep going, regardless of proposed Euro sanctions, until Trump withdraws support in terms of weapons and the USA Jewish diaspora stops funding Bibi. And Bibi is on record opposing the two-state solution, as will all the illegal squatters/settlers in occupied land." "Yes, Israel is using starvation as a weapon of war and it doesn't matter what the US or the UK-based lawyers think or how often Israel protest their innocence - the majority of the world's nations are appalled by their actions," writes Jeanette. "There is little difference between Netanyahu and people like Lenin, Stalin, Mao and others who used mass starvation as a weapon of destruction." Arthur writes: "There can be no doubt that Israel is using starvation as a weapon of war. Hamas does not care for the Palestinians and is just as responsible. Hamas is winning the war but not the battle. Hamas is letting Israel lose its world standing and thus lose the war. Israel is just blind to the realities. A two-state solution is the only glimmer of hope and eventually Israel will have to agree and start to obey international law." "Is Israel using starvation as a weapon of war? It's not even a question," writes Marilyn. "The evidence is there for all to see. I was reminded of the international standing Israel once had as I finished reading Maria van Lieshout's Song of a Blackbird yesterday. She describes the courage, compassion and resistance by the Dutch during World War II, so that Jewish people might be spared the ravages of the Nazis. One might think that those qualities would in turn be exhibited by Jewish people to others in recognition of sacrifices that many made towards the Jews in that era. That Western nations have barely begun to exercise their voices and possibly enact actions against Israel is beyond the comprehension of people with long memories." Bernard writes: "Thank you for this newsletter. Hamas may be a terrorist organisation, but Israel has become a terrorising state to the people of Gaza! Given the support Netanyahu gave Hamas to keep Gaza and the West bank divided, we can understand some of the murderous brutality he displays towards the group that assaulted Israel, but not the disproportionate killing of Palestinians. Albanese has asked us not to bring overseas conflicts to Australia, but we allow Australian/Israeli citizens to visit Israel and perform military service. And return to Australia! Since October 2023 how many 'Ausraelis' have departed Australia and performed military service in Israel? Allowing this migration is surely a case of Australia supporting the acts of genocide against Gazans!"
RNZ News
20-05-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
'Littleprexit' changes Australian politics, but there's more to come
By Annabel Crabb, ABC Liberal leader Sussan Ley and Nationals leader David Littleproud. he fracturing opens new opportunities for Labor in the Senate, where the government has multiple pathways to get legislation through. Photo: ABC / Matt Rovers Analysis - For 102 years now (apart from a brief and steamy affair with Joh Bjelke-Petersen in 1987) the country-based folk of Australia's National Party have been married to the urbanites of its Liberal Party. They've done big things together. At times, they've quietly loathed each other, for sure. They've fought about the usual things. Money. Infrastructure. Who does what around the House. Whether it's a big deal for one of the kids to be gay. They've stuck together, also for the usual reason, which is that neither of them has ever had the stomach for the drop in living standards that divorce would entail. But when Nationals leader David Littleproud convened a press conference with his colleagues Kevin Hogan and Bridget McKenzie yesterday, the vibe was very clear: "Kids, we've got some news." Everybody knew that Littleproud and the new Liberal leader, Sussan Ley, had been locked in discussion for days about the "Coalition agreement", which is a sort of triennial pre-nup the parties negotiate and sign after each election. Everybody knew that the Nats wanted Ley to promise she would support nuclear power, the $20 billion regional future fund that they nagged Peter Dutton for, and the introduction of divestiture powers over major supermarkets and big-box retailers. Are any of these things going to happen? No, they are not, because the Coalition lost the election. But marriages are about principles, as they should be. And of course we all know couples who've called it quits over fantasy amendments to section 46 of the Competition and Consumer Act. So there was a definite whiff of "Splitsville" in the air. Before confirming that he was walking out on the marriage , Littleproud first took care to explain that had been very patient and respectful and conducted the negotiations "very much at the pace of Sussan Ley," whose mother died last Saturday. "So much so… that I took the decision to drive to Albury, to commence these negotiations when she was ready." Having delivered this moving tribute to his own sensitivity and restraint (30 seconds during which, presumably, every divorced woman in Australia made a mental note to meet up with Ley soon for a cheeky pinot gris), Littleproud dropped the solemn news he'd come to deliver. The National Party (and its cognates, the Country Liberal Party and the "N-identifying" members of Queensland's LNP) would be moving out of the Coalition party room, in order to find themselves and possibly see other people. There was no rancour, only respect. Perhaps there was a chance of reconciliation down the track, but in the meantime a separation would be good for Ley as well, Littleproud thought. "She is a leader that needs to rebuild the Liberal Party. They are going on a journey of rediscovery, and this will provide them the opportunity to do that without the spectre of the National Party imposing their will." For good measure, he added: "I don't intend to take a step back when I take big steps forward in three years." What does this mean? Not the stepping back and forward thing, of course. Even Yoda would struggle with the specifics (though one is left with the generalised but unmistakeable suspicion that someone is about to get - or already has got - a very unwise tattoo). On a practical financial level, the divorce isn't good news for the Nats. The Liberals become the sole party of opposition, which means that the Nationals who would have otherwise been shadow ministers each lose nearly $60,000 a year in salary. But Littleproud insisted that these deprivations did not figure in the decision to split. As you would expect, from a man sufficiently saintly to drive to Albury for a meeting with a colleague whose Mum just died. More broadly, "Littleprexit" makes it harder for the Liberals to form a government, because they've almost always relied on Nationals numbers. Even John Howard's landslide win in 1996 only netted 75 seats for the Liberals in a Lower House of 148. A majority, but very vulnerable to an individual heart attack or dodgy travel claims. Very hairy territory for any gang member advocating a go-it-alone doctrine. But the mathematics of forming government feel like a very distant and future problem. Right now, the Liberal Party has a trek through the wilderness to undertake. And it may well be easier for Ley to guide this expedition now that she's not handcuffed to a junior companion constantly yammering at her to build them a nuclear reactor. There's little doubt that in both 2022 and 2025, the binding Coalition commitment to the policy demands of the Nationals is what caused the Liberals to lose most of their city seats. These existential questions can be considered at leisure, especially if you're divorced. But the more immediate and intriguing mathematics are found in the Senate, where results are not yet clear but Labor's best-case scenario looks to be 31 senators out of 76. Penny Wong - Labor's leader in the Upper House - needs 38 votes to get Labor legislation through. One way to collect those extra votes would be to make deals with the Greens, who look likely to return 11 senators. There will only be four Nationals in the new Senate, because deputy leader Perin Davey lost her seat and the CLP's Jacinta Nampijinpa Price defected, post-election, to the Liberal Party, which appears to have won custody of the NT senator in the divorce. But there will be heaps of Liberals in the new Senate. And who knows what the Liberal Party - dizzy with loss but also with the possibilities that freedom brings - might be prepared to try out? When the government brings its revised environmental laws to the Senate, for instance, what will the Liberal Party do? Stand by and let the Labor Party co-design environment policy with the Greens? Or pitch in and create an outcome that better suits Liberal voters? Two days ago, such an idea would have been unthinkable. Now? Still unlikely. But do not mistake the urgency of the Liberal Party's search for meaning and relevance. Ley - who spoke warmly of her party's ex in her press conference late yesterday and insisted that the door remained open to reconciliation - has insisted that the Liberals need to consider all possible options as part of their post-election review. She's of the oft-repeated view that her party needs to "meet Australians where they are." Right now, the immediate risk is that when the Liberal Party searches up the GPS coordinates for "where Australians are", they come up as "in a car, driving at speed away from you". In these circumstances, hot pursuit - while well-intended - can absolutely be misconstrued. So it's possible that Ley's low-speed model is prudent. The Liberals have struggled for some time to land the concept of "relatability" for Australian women. While not a planned move on Ley's part, "I got dumped 10 days after my Mum died, and I absolutely did not lose my rag" is the closest a Liberal leader has come to this Holy Grail. It doesn't change the fact that there is very little to be recommended for crushing defeat, if you're a political party. But when you're really on the mat, the only resource in which you're genuinely rich is time. Time's not something of which you ever have a surfeit when you're in government. And while the "conscious uncoupling" of the Coalition is indeed a ludicrously significant tectonic shift, it's possible that taking a break is actually the most useful thing these parties could do right now, with tensions at such an irreconcilable pitch. The Coalition is probably the only long-standing Australian marriage in which parties are obliged to sit down on a triennial basis for an explicit negotiation about how many jobs each constituent party will agree to do for the forthcoming three years. It's a much better model than the scheduled factory setting of the average Australian marriage. Three years of "Isn't this fun?" followed by five years of "My God, would it kill you to pick up a towel?", with separation occurring at eight years, and all outstanding legal matters done and dusted by 12. Will they get back together? Hope springs eternal. Democracies are never perfect, but the existence of decent oppositions are what nudge them above all the other options. - ABC
