Federal politics live: Legislation aiming to ban children and teenagers under 16 from social media will likely be introduced to parliament on Thursday

And we've had a mid-QT pivot. The Coalition is now turning its focus to quizzing the government on its so-called "big Australia" policy.

The opposition claims a new person has arrived in Australia every 44 seconds. The Nationals' Anne Webster asks Housing Minister Clare O'Neil where those people are going to live.

O'Neil points the finger back at Opposition Leader Peter Dutton, who was the home affairs minister in the last government.

"If there is a single person in this parliament who is responsible for that broken system, he sits over here in the opposition leaders' chair," she says.

After a point of order, O'Neil continues:

"Those opposite don't like to hear it much but the fact we have a person who was raised in public housing as our prime minister is a fact that every Australian should be proud of," she says.

"We have a housing crisis in the country that's been cooking for 30 years."

She says Labor is trying to pass its Help to Buy and Build to Rent legislation but it has been blocked.

"People on the crossbench, the Australian Greens, talk a big game about housing but when it comes to time to make change for real people, they say no.

"So who would have thought the far left and far right had so much in common in this country."

Shadow Treasurer Angus Taylor has asked Acting PM Richard Marles if Labor's stance on nuclear is actually due to their "political battle with the Greens in inner-city seats".

Marles's answer takes us back to year 10 English, flipping the question to focus on the Coalition's alliance with the Greens.

"Romeo and Juliet teaches us that love conquers all but I definitely do not think Shakespeare imagined what was going on here!" he says.

"What we are seeing here is the most unholy alliance between the Greens and the Liberals."

He goes onto reiterate that nuclear "makes no financial sense".

Here's to the women in the room today, bringing some very welcome pops of colour!

I'm sensing a trend today. Nuclear energy and short and sweet answers.

Nationals frontbencher Kevin Hogan has a go at trying to trip up Acting PM Richard Marles on the nuclear energy pact.

"Can the Acting Prime Minister confirm whether on 6 June 2024 the Albanese Labor government, through the Minister for Trade, signed an agreement under the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity that includes a cooperative work program to support the take-up of small modular nuclear reactors?" he asks.

Unfortunately for him, Marles doesn't take the bait. He simply responds.

"They crawl to this topic through every different alleyway, but let me be really clear: What I can absolutely confirm is that this government is not going to be pursuing a civil nuclear industry."

Crossbench MP Kylea Tink has lobbed a question to Treasurer Jim Chalmers about the government's electoral reforms.

"How does the government justify allowing public money to be used to pay the interests on political party loans when so many ordinary Australians are struggling?"

The reforms put a cap on political donations and spending but also boost the public funding per vote from around $3.40 at the last election up to $5.

It's a short and sweet answer from Chalmers. He salutes the work of his Senate colleague, Don Farrell, who has been working on the legislation for some time now to "lessen the impact of big money on politics".

"Minister Farrell, in his characteristically diligent and consultative way, has provided to the parliament, for the parliament's consideration, some steps that we think are necessary and sensible to achieve those objectives. We urge the parliament to support them," he says.

Tink tries to raise a point of order but she is not seen by Speaker Milton Dick before Chalmers concludes his answer.

Shadow Energy Minister Ted O'Brien has just listed off a huge list of nuclear supporters, namechecking Amazon, Google and even Young Labor. 

He asks why the government is so stubborn on its ban.

Acting PM Richard Marles starts by saying "it's all about cost and it's all about economics".

But he's quickly interrupted by O'Brien, whose interjections end up getting him kicked out of the chamber by Speaker Milton Dick. 

"Thank you, Mr Speaker," Marles continues after the interruption.

"It was a ridiculous display befitting what is a ridiculous policy that has been put forward by those opposite.

"It simply fails to ignore the inconvenient truth for those opposite that we don't have a civil nuclear industry in Australia today.

"And to establish one from scratch costs money and takes time."

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has the honour of the first question and quelle surprise, it is about nuclear energy.

He wants to know why Australia didn't sign up to a nuclear energy pact between the UK and US.

For context, the Brits originally included Australia which was expected to join the agreement in their statement announcing it, but that reference was deleted a short time after. Dutton and the Coalition seized on this yesterday during QT.

Before Richard Marles (who is in the big dog chair again today … the PM is on a plane home from South America), Speaker Milton Dick boots Labor's Matt Burnell from the chamber in what may be the quickest application of the 94a rule I've seen yet.

The Acting PM says the answer is simple: Australia won't be signing up because we don't have a civil nuclear energy establishment.

"The reason we don't seek to establish one is because, to do so would be to pursue the single most expensive form of electricity in the world today," he says.

He continues on, describing the pursuit of nuclear energy as a "fool's errand".

Let's dive in!

Independent MP Monique Ryan has lent her voice to another push to lower Australia' s voting age to 16.

There have been attempts over the years to let 16 and 17-year-olds take part in Democracy Sausage Day, given they're already eligible to drive, open bank accounts, get jobs and pay taxes.

Heck, you can even apply to join the army when you're 16!

"The young people of Australia are dealing with a climate crisis, a housing crisis, a cost-of-living crisis, and a HECS crisis," the former paediatrician says.

"I'm very much supportive of the move to lower the voting age to 16," she says.

At the moment there's nothing before the parliament that is pointing to that actually happening, but the campaign group Make It 16 was strutting through the house today sporting some very spiffy shirts which will surely help their cause.

Now, just rewinding a little bit to a press conference held by senators Matt Canavan and Alex Antic.

They were discussing their opposition to the mis and disinformation bill, but as tends to be the way, that leads to a question about the social media ban for under 16s. 

Antic says when it comes to the words "media" and "ban" they should stay "100 metres apart at all times".

Meanwhile, Canavan says he would like to see it face a Senate inquiry rather than be forced through with just six sitting days left in the year.

He adds he's yet to see the bill's details.

"There's so much that could go wrong here," he says.

"Lets face facts, we've got basically boomers writing this legislation and they really don’t have any idea how this stuff works."

He questions if tourists could be forced to enter verification details and asks the government to take a breath.

"We could be kicking a lot more 80-year-olds off Facebook than eight-year-olds," he adds.

The Coalition wants regional aged care homes to be given more flexibility with nursing requirements, as part of a series of amendments it's putting forward to the government's aged care bill.

Major reforms to the sector, following the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety, are currently before the Senate.

While the two major parties have agreed on funding changes, the opposition isn't totally happy with other elements of the bill.

For example, the legislation requires aged care homes to have at least one registered nurse (RN) on site at all times, unless they are given a specific exemption.

The opposition also wants that to apply if the "provider intends to provide the highest level of clinical care with the available workforce, which may include measures for the support of clinical care by enrolled nurses and through telehealth consultations with registered nurses".

While the Coalition won't hold up the overarching bill from passing, it does also want some of the "rules" that lie within the legislation to undergo further scrutiny through a Senate inquiry.

The amendments will have to be voted on.

He cites some policies we've already heard of, including powers to force large supermarkets to sell some of their stores and a fund for infrastructure to support new housing growth in green field areas.

And he promises to cut government spending: "We'll build businesses, not bureaucracies," he says.

Which is a wrap on this little economic exchange, and with it my blog cameo. Back to you, Courtney and Tessa.

It's clear this will be a key election theme for the Coalition.

He says Australia is a "proud migrant nation," but that not enough housing has been built to meet elevated levels of temporary migration in recent years.

He accuses the government of a "big Australia policy... [that] Australians didn't vote for."

The Coalition this week said it would vote down Labor's plan to cap international students because its design was faulty, sparking Labor accusations they were standing in the way of reducing migration.

Peter Dutton has promised to unveil policies of his own to slash both the permanent and temporary migration intake if elected.

Taylor accuses Chalmers of presiding over higher levels of income tax.

"How can Australians save under these circumstances ... the only option is to crack into the piggy bank."

The Coalition recently revealed it was unlikely to offer substantial new tax cuts of its own at the next election.

And the Reserve Bank notes that households are saving much less, but there's not much evidence that many are eating into their savings. Instead, a lot of households have borrowed more off the value of their homes to keep spending.

"Aspiration has become a luxury in this country," says Taylor.

Not such an optimistic picture from the opposition, as you'd expect. Labor has "made a bad situation worse," Taylor says in his opening.

He accuses Labor of budgets that are "expansionary ... keeping inflation higher for longer".

That's a reference to the debate over whether the government's cost of living relief has made inflation worse.

Reserve Bank governor Michele Bullock has been clear she does see spending from governments (including the states) as having some inflationary impact but has been just as quick to add she is not criticising the federal government, or anyone, directly.

Taylor also takes issue with Chalmers' talk of a "soft landing".

"There's nothing soft about the pain households are feeling."

And he emphasises falling household incomes, which he says is the "largest drop in the developed world" and has made Australians "poorer".

Chalmers turns to the government's budget strategy, celebrating two consecutive surpluses (spending less than revenue).

"We don't see surpluses, savings and a substantial turnaround in the budget as an end in itself, but how we take pressure off inflation and make room for things that we really value."

The assessment that the budget is taking pressure off inflation is not shared by everyone, and of course it's certainly not how the opposition sees things.

Shadow Treasurer Angus Taylor is up next.

Chalmers turns to the gender pay gap, after the Workplace Gender Equality Agency published new figures today showing the gap had narrowed somewhat.

The treasurer links that to the government's support for higher wages in aged care and childcare, both industries dominated by women.

"The average full-time worker is now earning $159 more per week since when we came to office, for women it's $173 per week more," he says.

After a warning that global conditions are "confronting", especially because of trade tensions and "fragmentation," Chalmers turns to the state of things at home.

He projects, backed by Treasury forecasts, "a gradual recovery", with household incomes – which have been falling – starting to lift again.

"Households are now feeling more confident about the next twelve months," he says, citing an ANZ Roy Morgan survey.

"This is the soft landing we have been planning for. Inflation coming back to band, an economy still growing and unemployment with a 4 in front of it."

The Reserve Bank is not quite so sure we're there yet, as I wrote about this morning. But they too think this 'soft landing', ridding us of inflation without a recession, is within reach.

Lots done, lots to do – that's the framing from the treasurer.

Plenty of storm clouds, but inflation falling, wages growing, jobs created, and the budget in surplus.

"Very cautious confidence and emerging optimism is welcome and warranted," he says.

But there's a nervous note, too.

"Even with very substantial progress in the aggregate numbers, we know that doesn't always translate to how people are faring and feeling day-to-day."

That just about sums up the economic debate as we head to the election. Whatever the numbers say, will people feel optimistic about the future?

Treasurer Jim Chalmers is on his feet in the chamber to deliver an update on the state of the economy.

I'll share some choice quotes as he goes, but first a headline from a copy of his remarks that has been provided to us.

And it's not great news for the budget bottom line. Treasurers have become accustomed to hauling in far more tax than they expect, year after year, because company tax is going gangbusters due to high commodity prices, and income tax is strong due to high employment.

But no longer. Chalmers will reveal Treasury expects to downgrade its expectation for company tax when the mid-year budget update drops in December. It would be the first time that has happened since 2020.

And overall, Treasury thinks any extra tax take will be "a sliver" of what it was in previous budgets.

To blame: weakness in the Chinese economy pulling down commodity prices, especially for iron ore.