Chris Hayes (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Like the member for Prospect, I see some dichotomies between what the government is saying in the House of Representatives and what seems to be being said in the Senate. Only two or three weeks ago I read with interest in the Weekend Australian some quotes from Senator Judith Troeth. As will be recalled, Senator Troeth chaired the government’s one-week-long investigation into Work Choices—five days of hearings and the committee were not allowed to leave Canberra. I think they received in the vicinity of 1,000 submissions, but they only got to talk to about half-a-dozen people—not many at all.

Senator Troeth’s comments reported in the paper were about the impact on regional areas of temporary training visas. She said words to the effect that she would find it thoroughly unacceptable for people to be able to come in and undercut the pay and conditions of Australian workers and to take their jobs temporarily, because she was concerned about what this would do to regional economies.

I actually found some level of parallel with that. At Spotlight, for instance, we are inviting people to come in and take jobs now—not negotiate around flexibility and not negotiate whether there should be a reduction in penalty rates or whether overtime should apply. There are no negotiations here. Like those contracts for people who take jobs in country areas under these visas, these contracts are set in concrete before people even get a chance to negotiate. They just sign them. You either sign the contract or do not take the job. The member for Deakin referred to that in an MPI discussion the other day, and I have to say I appreciate his honesty. He said that no-one is asking them to take the job; they either sign the contract or do not take the job.

Having regard to Senator Troeth’s position on regional and rural Australia—and no doubt her comments were on the impact of these temporary training visas—have the minister and the government costed the effect on the local economies in regional and rural Australia and how they will be impacted upon as a consequence of Work Choices? I am sure the minister will not take the view that this means flexibility and that jobs will be more plentiful and people will be paid more. He knows that will not be the case. Every man and his dog out there knows that that will not be the case. All the experiences since the Work Choices legislation was brought in demonstrate that blue-collar working Australians are far worse off under AWAs under Work Choices than under any other form of collective bargaining.

I have a special soft spot in my heart for people who come from regional and rural Australia. It is not as though they can simply say, ‘I’m not going to take that job,’ because it might be 200 or 300 kilometres to the next job. They do not have any choices under this legislation. If it is possible, as we all know it is, whether or not there is a collective agreement in place, for an employer to simply force people to sign an AWA or compel them to sign—and I know it is no longer duress to hound someone to sign—

See this speech in context