Australia election 2025 dwell: Marles insists he retains ‘deep’ belief in US regardless of Sign chat scandal; Dutton reveals large defence spending increase

Coalition assist ladies in ADF fight roles – Hastie

Shadow defence minister Andrew Hastie says he and the Coalition assist ladies serving in fight roles within the defence drive.

Hastie tells ABC RN Breakfast that he spoke to Australia’s secretary of the defence and the ADF chief and the Coalition helps that place.

Questions on the difficulty had been raised when it was revealed the now disendorsed candidate Benjamin Britton had stated ladies shouldn’t serve in fight roles.

Hastie had made comparable remarks again in 2018.

This morning he stated:

The Coalition has a powerful place, and that’s that every one fight roles needs to be open to women and men. I signalled that to the secretary of defence, Mr Greg Moriarty, and the chief of defence drive final week in my caretaker transient, as a part of the caretaker conventions, they’ve a really clear image of the place the Coalition stands.

Pushed on whether or not this implies ladies ought to meet the identical bodily customary as males, Hastie says:

It’s one customary for all of the fight roles within the ADF [that] are open for women and men, and the Coalition will insist on one customary for all, which is, which is honest and equitable.

O’Neil and Hume in Dawn spat

Labor frontbencher Clare O’Neil and Liberal frontbencher Jane Hume have clashed this morning on their common Wednesday Dawn panel.

Issues acquired a bit of tense over the Coalition’s make money working from home coverage (which they’ve now dropped) and the Coalition’s accusation that Labor has been “mud slinging”.

Hume and opposition chief Peter Dutton have each been saying in current days that Labor’s been throwing mud and that’s been inflicting a drop in assist for the Coalition.

You’ll be able to have a learn of simply how messy issues acquired (and that is solely a portion of the transcript):

Hume: You’re significantly suggesting you haven’t thrown any mud?

O’Neil: Sorry, do you thoughts if I communicate, Jane?

Hume: Sling away!

O’Neil: This make money working from home concern, it was a horrible factor to do.

Hume: And it’s not our coverage. It’s not our coverage. It’s not our coverage…

O’Neil: You’re being so extremely impolite, Jane.

Hume: You’re speaking about one thing that’s irrelevant.

O’Neil: It is a democracy and I’m a politician making an attempt to have my say. I listened to you politely.

Hume says Labor ‘mud slinging’ affecting ladies’s assist for Coalition

Shadow finance minister Jane Hume says the Coalition have a “pep in their step” following final night time’s leaders’ debate. (You’ll don’t have any hassle guessing who she reckons gained.)

Hume tells the At this time present she had a “much more buoyant” feeling than she’d anticipated down on the pre-poll cubicles in Tassie yesterday. Bass, held by Liberal MP Bridget Archer, and Braddon, held by outgoing Liberal MP Gavin Pearce, are two must-hold seats for the Coalition.

However on the subject of the query of why ladies aren’t supporting the Coalition, Hume says it’s a casualty of the “mud slinging” by Labor.

I’ve little doubt that a number of the mud that the prime minister and the Labor celebration has slung at Peter Dutton over this final marketing campaign has begun to stay. That’s really unlucky, as a result of solely a Coalition authorities will ship the empowerment to Australian ladies.

Hume was a co-author of a autopsy into the Coalition’s 2022 loss, the place a declining feminine vote was a major issue. One of many suggestions was getting extra ladies into native branches, and preselecting extra ladies in winnable seats. You’ll be able to see how the Coalition have completed on that entrance right here:

Ley says value of Coalition guarantees will likely be ‘fully transparent’ earlier than election

The query of how the Coalition pays for his or her defence dedication, and different election guarantees, nonetheless must be answered.

Deputy Liberal chief Sussan Ley is on Sky Information and is probed on when these figures will come out (notably with voters already headed to the polls).

Ley says:

Our costings will likely be launched within the lead-up to election day, totally clear, demonstrating a greater backside line. Every little thing will likely be there.

ABC Information Breakfast host James Glenday asks Marles in regards to the newest reviews of US defence secretary Pete Hegseth sharing delicate army data together with his spouse, brother and private lawyer on an unclassified messaging system.

Does Marles fear in regards to the data he shares with Hegseth? Marles says:

I don’t and clearly I’m not going to touch upon the reviews in the US. However now we have a really shut relationship with the US on the subject of defence. It’s deep, it’s natural and it’s trusted.

Marles says he has “complete confidence” in the way in which the 2 international locations have interaction and change data.

Marles says can’t belief Liberals on ‘anything they say’ about defence

Deputy PM and defence minister Richard Marles is doing the rounds right now, responding to the Coalition’s promise to spice up defence spending to 2.5% of GDP over the following 5 years.

Marles tells ABC Information Breakfast the opposition hasn’t outlined what that further $21bn can be spent on within the defence drive, or the place the cash would come from.

I simply don’t suppose you’ll be able to belief the Liberals on the subject of something they are saying in respect of defence.

There are some reviews that the two.5% is a goal, there’s no clarification of how they’re paying for this, the place the cash’s coming from, or actually is there an evidence of the place the cash is being spent on?

Marles says Labor has invested the “biggest peacetime increase in defence spending since the second world war” and the federal government will proceed to evaluate what degree of spending “there needs to be”.

Beneath the present authorities’s trajectory, defence spending would rise from 2.02% of GDP this yr to 2.3% by 2034.

Good morning,

Krishani Dhanji right here with you, because of Martin Farrer for getting us began this morning.

The countdown continues with simply 10 days to go of the marketing campaign – though for a lot of of you it would really feel even shorter in case you’re getting ready to vote early.

And the marketing campaign is again in drive, after a momentary pause throughout the day yesterday, following the demise of Pope Francis. All barbs had been out final night time throughout the leaders’ debate, which you’ll examine right here.

This morning’s large announcement is the Coalition’s promise to spend $21bn further on defence, and we’re already seeing loads of response to it. We’ll carry all that to you because it is available in.

And listed below are the 5 key takeaways from the controversy, one among which being “do we really need another one on Sunday?”

The Coalition’s election commitments now complete greater than $50bn – not together with the brand new defence announcement, based on Labor evaluation which it’s utilizing to strain Peter Dutton to disclose his personal numbers as the three Could ballot quick approaches.

With simply 10 days left within the election marketing campaign, neither Labor or the Coalition have launched their election costings, which might element the influence of their commitments – together with any proposed cuts – to the funds backside line.

Labor will on Wednesday launch its personal evaluation of the Coalition’s election guarantees, which places the price of proposed spending at greater than $50bn.

The determine tallies up the price of virtually 25 insurance policies, together with;

• $10bn one-off revenue tax lower for low-to-middle revenue earners

• $6bn to halve the gasoline excise for 12 months

• $5bn housing infrastructure program

• $1.5bn for Melbourne airport rail

• $1bn for fuel infrastructure fund

The general determine doesn’t embrace the Coalition’s dedication to extend defence spending, or its promise to match Labor’s $8.5bn increase to Medicare, which is already accounted for within the funds.

The determine additionally doesn’t think about prices for Dutton’s proposed nuclear reactors, which aren’t slated to be constructed till the mid-2030s onwards.

The opposition chief is planning to financial institution financial savings from a slimmed-down federal public service and make unspecified cuts in different areas.

In a press release, the treasurer, Jim Chalmers, stated Dutton should “come clean on his secret cuts and even harsher cuts”.

Each further greenback of spending by the Liberals means an additional greenback lower from well being and schooling.

Their dodgy and misleading figures already present a funds black gap value billions they usually’ve acquired tens of billions of unaccounted spending on high of that.

Australia will sink billions of {dollars} extra into defence below a future Coalition authorities, as Peter Dutton appears to be like to bolster the nation’s armed forces, Australian Related Press reviews.

Recent off the third leaders’ debate, the opposition chief pledged to spend $21bn over the following 5 years on defence, which might take its share of Australia’s gross home product to 2.5%.

The extent of defence spending as a proportion of Australia’s economic system would then rise additional to three% throughout the decade.

Whereas the Coalition stated it might use the cash to reinstate a fourth joint strike fighter squadron, it didn’t say the place else the funding would go.

Dutton stated the additional spending on defence was wanted in unsure instances globally.

“The prime minister and the deputy prime minister regularly tell Australians that we live in the most precarious period since the end of the second world war. Yet over the last three years Labor has done nothing about it,” he stated.

The Coalition will strengthen the Australian defence drive and assist our servicemen and girls to maintain us secure right now and into generations forward morale.

The announcement comes after Dutton and Anthony Albanese clashed on the third leaders’ debate in Sydney, with the opposition chief narrowly declared the winner.

As each leaders slung accusations of mendacity to one another throughout the hour-long debate, Albanese emphasised a necessity for stability following uncertainty from US president Donald Trump.

Albanese will start right now campaigning in Sydney, whereas Dutton will likely be in Perth.

Should you missed the leaders’ debate, right here is our full story by Henry Belot.

Welcome

Martin Farrer

Good morning and welcome to our dwell information weblog. I’m Martin Farrer with a few of our high in a single day tales earlier than I hand the information baton to Krishani Dhanji.

Peter Dutton has blamed poor polling throughout the election marketing campaign on Labor assault advertisements somewhat than his personal efficiency, together with two errors and ditching a coverage to drive some public servants to work from their places of work. The third debate was a principally lacklustre affair that livened up when the leaders had been requested to call the opposite’s largest lie. 9’s three-person panel awarded the competition to Dutton by a vote of 2-1.

The opposition chief launches an enormous defence coverage right now, with a promise to carry defence spending to 2.5% of the economic system. Extra on this quickly.

Amid extra turmoil on the world’s monetary markets because of Donald Trump’s financial insurance policies, there are issues that the Australian Treasury has underestimated the risk posed by the US commerce conflict after the Worldwide Financial Fund slashed its outlook for Australia’s financial development in 2025. It forecast annual output will likely be $13bn decrease this yr than predicted in January and that actual GDP development will drop to 1.6%, from 2.1%. Extra developing.

And in more cash issues, we’re reporting this morning that Australians would have to attend 70 years for reasonably priced housing if property values observe the “sustainable growth” path advocated by the 2 main events. A number one economist calls the claims a “con”.