
AI-generated summary
The Coalition has proposed criminalising serious public desecration of the Australian flag with penalties up to 12 months imprisonment, extending to war memorial damage and enshrining Australia Day in law requiring a plebiscite to change its date. Previous attempts to ban flag burning were rejected by former PM John Howard on free speech grounds.
Angus Taylor has rejected claims the Coalition’s push to criminalise burning of the Australian flag is an attempt to undercut One Nation, insisting penalties of up to a year in prison are necessary to “stand up for our country”.
The One Nation leader, Pauline Hanson, has previously called for criminal penalties for flag burning, with a petition by the party attracting approximately 50,000 signatures last year.
Under the policy announced on Sunday, anyone convicted under a new criminal offence of serious public desecration of the Australian flag would face up to 12 months’ imprisonment, provided their actions were reckless in inciting hatred or violence, or threatened public order or caused a public disturbance.
A new criminal offence would also be created for deliberately damaging, defacing, desecrating or destroying war memorials and other significant sites commemorating Australia’s history.
The plan would also “protect” Australia Day on 26 January by enshrining it in law, requiring a national plebiscite to change the timing of national day celebrations.
“We have seen on recent Australia Days and Anzac Days burning of the Australian flag, graffiti on monuments, war memorial monuments around Australia,” Taylor said.
“It’s completely unacceptable, completely unacceptable. So it’s time to stand up for Australia, our heritage, our history.”
Challenged over whether the plan was about trying to dint One Nation’s political support ahead of the next election, Taylor told News24 it was “not about that” and the laws would “help the country”.
“It is a symbol, it is part of our nation and our heritage that really matters.
“To see it being burnt is unacceptable to most Australians and certainly unacceptable to me, and I think it’s appropriate that a penalty of up to a year imprisonment is established.”
Former Liberal prime minister John Howard rejected previous attempts to criminalise flag burning, including in 2002, describing the act as a matter of free speech.
Howard called flag burning “repugnant” but said the right to protest was part of the “free speech code that we have in this country”.
In September 2025, Hanson said a law against flag burning would ensure the national symbol got the reverence it deserved.
“We should bring back those assemblies in our schools where we all stood every morning while our flag was raised, and we must punish and penalise those who would desecrate our flag and disrespect our nation and the Australian people,” she said.
The assistant foreign affairs minister, Matt Thistlethwaite, said on Sunday the Coalition’s policy was unnecessary.
“There’s been several attempts over the last 10 years, or longer than that, 30 years, around this issue, and it may impinge on Australians’ freedom of expression and their freedom of speech,” he said on Sunday.
“I think that there’s a bit of an element of desperation there, trying to chase One Nation, and further to the right, and to capture some of those votes,” he said.
The Australian flag was flown for the first time in September 1901, after it was chosen in a design competition established by the country’s first prime minister, Sir Edmund Barton.
The competition attracted nearly 33,000 entries, of which 5 near identical designs were awarded equal first place. The design was modified to its current form in 1908, including the seven-pointed federation star.
Laws enacted by the Howard government in 1998 required that the flag could only be changed with the agreement of the Australian people.
AI outlook — possibilities, not facts
The Coalition's flag burning legislation will face legal challenges based on free speech grounds
Possible · Within months
Trade talks between the United States and Canada have collapsed, with both sides expressing deepening tensions over tariffs and sovereignty concerns. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney ended negotiations, prompting backlash from US officials and threats of steeper tariffs, while Canadians show strong support for standing firm despite economic risks.
Queensland Deputy Premier Jarrod Bleijie confirmed that a 13-tower, 2,200-home development on Brisbane's Northshore Hamilton site will not include affordable housing, despite the state's worsening affordability crisis, citing the removal of Labor-era mandates and claiming market-rate sales.
The Tasmanian government's PlanBuild planning portal has experienced a $6.5 million cost blowout, rising from an original $9.7 million budget to $16.2 million in total spending, with Hobart City Council calling the system 'unfit for purpose' and demanding fee waivers until fixes are made.
Premier Ben Carroll announced a $550 million commitment to upgrade Melbourne's Western Freeway between Melton and Caroline Springs, adding to $1 billion in federal funding, with plans for interchange upgrades and a new half interchange to reduce traffic congestion ahead of the November state election.
Opposition Leader Angus Taylor and Shadow Home Affairs Minister Jonno Duniam advocate for an 80% cut to tobacco excise to undercut the illegal cigarette market, citing Canada's historical tax cuts and subsequent law enforcement efforts as a model, while asserting legal tobacco prices already match illicit levels and will not increase smoking rates.
Opposition Leader Angus Taylor and Shadow Housing Minister Andrew Bragg advocate reducing red tape in Australia's National Construction Code to build more basic, affordable homes, arguing current standards are too costly and complex. They propose an 80-90 page 'mandatory core' covering structural safety, with energy efficiency and accessibility as optional extras. Critics warn this could worsen inequality, increase long-term costs, and disadvantage low-income and disabled Australians, while industry groups remain divided on the approach.