Australia politics live: Coalition targets Labor on taxes and migration in question time as two Liberal MPs booted from chamber

Key events

Show key events only

Please turn on JavaScript to use this feature

Universities Australia says it will ‘consider’ Greg Graven’s assessment of antisemitism on campuses

Craven said “antisemitic intimidation” was continuing on campuses, including the use of chants like “Globalise the Intifada” and “from the river to the sea”.

He said “confronting flags” were also routinely flown on campus and “antisemitic statements” were being made in classrooms.

Craven conceded that with few exceptions, universities had “recited” a definition of antisemitism orally, in writing, or both. But he said they had not “embedded” an antisemitism definition “as a fundamental conceptual and binding principle of a university’s character”.

Many universities deal with antisemitism either by curt reference in their racism policies, or even by an assumed anonymous inclusion within racial discrimination as expressed within those policies.

He singled out the University of Canberra, Swinburne University, Southern Cross University, The University of Southern Queensland and Charles Darwin University as displaying “evidence of progress” towards embedding an antisemitism definition in their policies.

A spokesperson for Universities Australia said it would continue to work closely with Segal to combat antisemitism and “carefully consider” Thursday’s report.

Universities across the country have strengthened policies, complaint pathways, support services, education programs and codes of conduct in response to instances of antisemitism on campuses.

In 2025, Universities Australia worked with the sector to adopt a definition of antisemitism to help guide universities’ responses and support safer and more inclusive campus environments.

Australian universities accused of ‘sectoral failure’ in not adequately adopting an antisemitism definition

Universities have failed to meaningfully adopt a definition of antisemitism, constitutional lawyer Greg Craven has found.

Craven was hand-picked by the antisemitism envoy, Jillian Segal, to lead the initiative as part of a wide-ranging plan handed down to the federal government last July to combat antisemitism.

Craven wrote in his assessment that without universities failing to “adequately address” an antisemitism definition he couldn’t issue individual report cards for universities assessing their policies and procedures. He wrote:

This in and of itself represents a grave inability of Australian universities in addressing the substantial emergence of antisemitism on their campuses, amounting to sectoral failure. Antisemitism is a continuing and very serious problem within Australian universities.

The failure of Australian universities to adopt a definition of antisemitism is indeed sectoral ... The result for the Report Card process as a whole is that it has in a sense “short circuited”.

Segal said Craven’s assessment made for “sobering reading” and remained “convinced that the adoption of a definition of antisemitism is absolutely essential for combatting antisemitism”.

She said she had written to all vice chancellors asking them to “continue to engage and take the necessary steps to properly adopt and operationalise a definition of antisemitism”, with a view to individual report cards being issued next year.

Craven said if universities continued to display “further sectoral definitional failure”, the minister should intervene and funding and registrations could be withdrawn.

TLDR: here’s what happened in question time

The Coalition went down the integrity path over Labor’s broken promise not to touch negative gearing and CGT, but were forced to rejig their questions, after speaker Milton Dick ruled they couldn’t accuse Labor of lying in their questions. Instead Taylor and Wilson said Labor mislead, deceived, bent the truth and accused them of “untruths”.

The government fired back, justifying the moves, and attacking Angus Taylor’s integrity.

Independent MP Nicolette Boele asked when the government would introduce a gas export tax – she didn’t get much of an answer, while the prime minister said that taxing exports could come back to “bite”.

Liberal MP Tony Pasin was ejected from the chamber after a dramatic exchange where he screamed at the PM. Soon after, Liberal MP Phil Thompson was also booted from the house.

And Anika Wells got a non-budget question, grilled on her use of taxpayer funded travel where she held a “sideline meeting” at a friend’s 40th birthday.

In pictures: the final question time for the week

New One Nation MP says banning ABC from press conference either a mistake or a ‘lesson’

Newly elected One Nation MP David Farley says ejecting ABC journalists from attending a press conference during the campaign for Farrer was either a “mistake” or a “lesson”.

At a surreal press conference given not in Canberra, but at state parliament in Sydney, Farley joined with the independent state MP for Murray, Helen Dalton, to criticise the Minns government’s water management legislation, which passed parliament this morning, as we reported earlier.

Amid speculation about state MPs defecting to One Nation, Dalton quickly dispelled the notion that she was joining the party, saying she had turned down a request by Pauline Hanson to run in the past.

Farley says he and Dalton are “very much aligned, both on policy, both on intent, and more importantly, we’re aligned on the aspiration of the future for both Murray and Farrer”. He would not be drawn on which western Sydney seats the party might target, as signalled by Barnaby Joyce.

Asked if the party’s decision to eject local ABC journalists from a Farrer press conference with Hanson was a mistake, Farley says:

It may have been, you know, you could consider it a mistake, but I suppose it could be a lesson as well. But, you know, I was engaged with the ABC during the campaign and immediately after the campaign. So the regional ABC has been very equitable in Farrer and across Murray.

Asked by the ABC’s state political reporter if the same was true at state level, Farley says: “That’s a question for Helen”.

Question time ends

After a final dixer to the prime minister, question time (extended edition) ends for the week.

Anika Wells asked about ‘sideline meeting’ at friend’s birthday party

We’re moving away from the budget for a moment, as Liberal MP Mary Aldred asks the communications minister, Anika Wells, about where she was when she held a “sideline meeting” at a 40th birthday party that she used to claim travel expenses for.

Was the meeting “at the bar, the garden kiosk or the room with the pinball machine?”, asks Aldred.

Wells looks as if she’d rather be anywhere else and rushes through her answer.

She says that she provided a full account to the travel watchdog (and repaid $10,000 of incorrect travel expenses earlier this month).

Wells says:

I have a full account of that a full report available published online, and you can refer there to the full account of the trip, which was considered completely within the rules.

Question time is still going … ?

We’re up to 90 minutes of question time, which is a bit longer than it normally runs – usually over by 3.10, we’re now past 3.30pm. On the Thursday of a sitting week, when everyone is itching to go home, normally it’s a brief affair. Why would they keep it running longer than normal today?

We couldn’t possibly speculate, but there’s been accusations in the past of the government seeking to extend question time on budget reply day – to give their opponent, the opposition leader, less time to prepare and practice their budget reply speech at 7.30pm.

The prime minister controls how long or short QT runs for. Anthony Albanese could keep it going all afternoon if he felt like it. The government seems very happy to keep chatting about their budget and all their new policies, so they might just be keen to keep unpacking all the new funding promises.

But every minute QT runs for is one minute less for Angus Taylor to get ready for his big moment.

Back to the crossbench, independent MP Nicolette Boele asks about the impact changes to capital gains tax will have on renewable energy investment.

Jim Chalmers says the government is doing consultation and that there are transitional arrangements in place that will protect renewables investments.

The purpose of it is to make sure that we are not providing additional tax breaks that are not enjoyed by Australians.

The budget we handed down took further steps to transform our energy system, making it easier to build easier to invest.

Albanese and Taylor trade barbs over integrity

Angus Taylor is back, accusing Labor of having misled, deceived, and bent the truth on housing taxes, investment taxes, and breaking a previous promise not to change taxes on farmers and small businesses.

He asks, “When did the prime minister decide that the truth does not matter?”

The Coalition is going hard on the integrity line, trying to pin the prime minister down for lying (without saying the L-word).

The PM thanks Taylor for the broad question – which means he can give a very broad answer – and tries to turn the spotlight back on to the opposition leader.

The Member for Hume [Taylor] promised they would be better off if they made him leader. That’s going really well.

Of course what we know is the Member for Hume has had himself the best indicator of future performances is past performance … That is why you can look at past performance because they managed to go to an election saying there would oppose or reverse tax cuts.

Dan Tehan tells the prime minister to be respectful of the opposition leader, but Milton Dick quips, “unfortunately we are well down the path of showing respect today.”

Albanese ignores Tehan and says Taylor is an endangered species – under threat from Andrew Hastie.

The Member for Canning will give him what he deserves very soon, Mr Speaker.

Spender calls for legislated bracket creep returns

When will the government legislate returning additional tax takes from negative gearing and CGT changes to reduce income tax, asks independent MP Allegra Spender.

She’s a fan of the changes, but wants to see the extra revenue go directly into reversing bracket creep.

Jim Chalmers has been giving us a forward sizzle on future tax cuts, by saying that the working Australian tax offset (WATO) included in the budget gives the government, and future governments, additional ways to return bracket creep. But it might not be through legislation as Spender is calling for. The WATO will give all workers $250 when they lodge their 2027-2028 tax returns.

He says the government has already given workers five tax cuts – including the stage three tax cut changes, the $1000 instant tax deduction (which will come into effect this year) and the WATO.

It means a future government either political persuasion has a broader range of options when it comes to returning bracket creep as this government has been doing enthusiastically and regularly.

This is a government that looks to give bracket creep back when it is affordable to do so. We would like to get the opportunity to do that again into the future.

Liberal MP Phil Thompson booted from chamber

Before Liberal frontbencher Melissa McIntosh can ask the next question, her colleague Phil Thompson is kicked out of the chamber for interjecting too much during a dixer to Richard Marles (that brings our ejection count to two).

McIntosh says the PM declared last year that changes to negative gearing would increase rents, which was also confirmed in Tuesday’s budget papers. (Treasury estimated the changes would make the average household rent increase about $2 per week).

Anthony Albanese is really milking Tim Wilson’s book today, which he’s been quoting from since yesterday – and it gets another plug in this answer. The shadow treasurer wrote that capital gains tax discounts have been unjust for younger Australians.

The change that we brought in will allow negative gearing to still exist, and of course people will invest, if they are looking to use negative gearing, in new builds rather than old properties … What it will do is to also boost supply.

Butler justifies cutting private health insurance rebates for over-65s

Independent MP Rebekha Sharkie is next, and says that pensioners in her electorate who have been hit with the removal of private health insurance rebates, will see their premiums soar “by up to $1600 for a couple”.

The change was announced by the health minister, Mark Butler, last month alongside changes to the national disability insurance scheme and were included in Tuesday’s budget.

Butler disputes the figure that he says has been “bandied about”, and that the change will increase private health insurance fees somewhere between $230 and $250 a year.

We don’t think there is a strong policy rationale to pay different Australians different levels of support for private health insurance when they are on the same income simply because of age.

If there are two households next to each other on the same income, one household working age, raising kids, taking up private health insurance, we don’t see any rationale for paying them a lower level of support than a household next door that happens to be on the same income but of an older age.

Coalition puts the spotlight on migration numbers

Labor is 77,000 homes behind on its 1.2m home target, while 1.4 million migrants have entered the country since Anthony Albanese became prime minister, says s MP Alison Penfold, and asks where the government is housing all the migrants.

It’s not a surprising line of questioning – with the opposition leader, Angus Taylor, to focus on restricting immigration in his budget-in-reply address tonight.

The prime minister says the government is “throwing everything” at its housing targets, and introduced measures like forcing universities to build additional accommodation for international students (which he says was opposed by the Coalition).

He doesn’t engage on the migration numbers, and focuses on increasing supply, and levelling the playing field to enter the housing market. The budget also includes an extension on banning foreign investors from buying homes.

Albanese says:

The shadow treasurer said that the current system, to quote him, “favours well-off established interests against those trying to get ahead”.

Mr Speaker, we want people to get ahead we want people to be able to live with the security of their own roof over their head.

s MP Anne Webster is up next and says 40,000 nurses, 38,000 teachers, and almost 10,000 police officers have negatively geared properties – so why is the PM pulling up the ladder on them when he’s been climbing it himself?

Anthony Albanese says he disagrees with the premise of the question, because all those teachers, nurses and police officers can continue to negatively gear their properties. They can also negatively gear more properties if they buy new dwellings.

He adds that the policies will help younger emergency and frontline workers who aren’t in the property market compete with fewer investors to buy their own homes.

People go out there and they invest in investment properties in order to increase their assets and their wealth during their lifetime. Good on them …

Not by having investments hidden behind trusts, not by having investments through the Cayman Islands, but by investing here in properties here and we encourage that and celebrate that.

Liberal MP Tony Pasin booted from chamber in heated exchange

Why do 20 out of the 23 cabinet ministers that own more than two homes get to keep negatively gearing those properties, but young people wanting to get into the market can’t, asks Liberal MP Simon Kennedy.

Anthony Albanese turns the question back to the opposition, asking why Angus Taylor didn’t ask the question, instead of the “new kid” Kennedy. A quick look at Taylor’s register of interests shows he has two family trusts, and owns one property with his wife, who also owns an additional property.

The PM – famously – bought a $4.3m home with his new wife, Jodie Haydon, on the Central Coast, for “down the track”, he says.

There’s a bit of a scuffle as the PM says something unparliamentary which causes the House to erupt. It gets even more heated as Liberal MP Tony Pasin shouts at the PM to withdraw it (we didn’t hear what Albanese said), but Pasin’s interjections see him promptly kicked out of the chamber.

Albanese then withdraws, and continues with an attack on the Coalition’s line of questioning:

It is extraordinary and shows their failure to actually have any legitimate criticism of our policy that they chose to go down this road.

When will Australia get a gas export tax?

Over to the crossbench, independent Sophie Scamps asks the prime minister why the revenue promised by the petroleum resource rent tax is always “around the corner” and isn’t ramping up, and if the government will tax gas exports.

Anthony Albanese says that right now the government is focused on fuel, and that gas companies are already paying tax through a range of mechanisms.

Indeed the budget on Tuesday night, contrary to the suggestion in the member’s question, PRRT revenue was revised up by $1.6bn in this budget.

A bit of context here – the PRRT actually brought in $100m less money than forecast in the last financial year, but saw a small revise upwards in the forecasts for PRRT take over the forward estimates compared to the last budget.

The PRRT (bearing in mind that it’s not the only tax mechanism) still only reclaims just over half the revenue that the beer excise does.

Albanese continues, saying that Australia is a reliable international gas partner, and that the east coast gas reservation scheme will help keep domestic gas prices lower.

We will introduce the domestic gas reservation scheme, so more Australians’ gas stays in Australian homes and businesses and I note as well the gas prices are down, not up at the moment.

We’re engaging with our partners in the region and we honour of course our existing export contracts because that is the way that you engage in international trade. If you don’t do that, then it comes back certainly to bite you.