Ian Causley (Page, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Hansard source

But I still had to pay my union fees, of course, even though they took us out and we lost money. The fact is that we got £2 a fortnight productivity loading. Just imagine how long we were going to have to work to make up the £100 we lost. The thing about this legislation is that it does not abolish unions. I just do not understand why the unions are so petrified. I imagine they are petrified because they do not want to get off their butts and work; they do not want to get out there and represent the workers. If the unions represented the workers, the workers would support them. But they do not; they go out there and look after themselves. The union bosses do deals with some of the big business people around the place. We have all heard about some union reps who have big houses with swimming pools—some of them in Sydney. If they were representing the workers they would have no problems because the legislation allows the unions to negotiate on behalf of the workers. The unions are not abolished, so they should be able to get out there and do something if they are prepared to get off their backsides and do it. I believe in unions. I was a member of a union. But I think the unions have caused this themselves because they have lost sight of what they were intended to do—and that was to represent the majority opinion of workers.

Let us go through some of these issues. I think some of them need to be talked about. The task force that we just heard about from the member for Gorton went through my electorate. Surprisingly, I had a cockatoo at the meeting. Twelve people turned up—12 people. I also checked up with the member for Richmond to see how many turned up there—11 turned up there. The member for Gorton is here quoting what he heard at the task force. For goodness’ sake! If 12 people is representative of the workers of my electorate then I have to say, ‘Pity help us with the government we are going to get from over there.’

Let us look at the Spotlight issue. The Prime Minister has said quite often that you always want to look behind the detail of the issues that are raised in this parliament. You always want to look behind the questions. On the detail that was raised in this parliament about Spotlight in Coffs Harbour and Mrs Harris being offered an AWA, and the 2c that the member for Perth paraded around with and the 2c that was held up here by the members of the opposition: Mrs Harris did not take up the AWA. It was offered to her. She stayed on the award. She was able to stay on the award, and she stayed on the award. Mrs Harris, of course, is an ex-schoolteacher who works 15 hours a week at Spotlight and is the union rep. We didn’t hear about that, did we? No, we never heard about that in the issues that were brought up.

We also heard today about an issue—raised, I think, by the member for Perth—about warehouse wages. I think it was in Sydney; I might be wrong on that. Just by chance, a fortnight ago, flying home from Sydney to Lismore, I happened to meet the son of a very good friend of mine who happened to be on the plane. I said to him, ‘What are you doing?’ and he said, ‘I’m working in Sydney.’ Now, I have nine per cent unemployment in my electorate, and half of them do not want to work. They have said in the papers that they want to continue to surf. This guy had gone out and got a job in a warehouse in Sydney. He was the foreman of the warehouse. And he said to me, ‘You know, we’re offering $25 to $30 an hour’—in a warehouse in Sydney—‘and we can’t get workers.’ Yet out in the mid-west of Sydney there is 10 per cent unemployment. What is the member for Watson doing about that, about people who are only a few kilometres away? Here is the work. It is available. But I dare say he would be like the member for Richmond. When I raised the issue in the papers up in my area about the fact that I have nine per cent unemployment yet employers cannot get workers, she said, ‘You can’t force them to work.’ That is typical Labor, isn’t it? That is typical Labor; there is no doubt about it.

Let us talk about another issue that keeps on being referred to and raised by the Labor Party, about the government holding down wages. The Prime Minister has told us that in our period of government wages have increased by 16 per cent, compared to three per cent—or I think it might have been two per cent—under the Labor Party. Let us talk about it. They keep on saying, ‘Of course, if the government’s offers’—which I dare say means the employers’ offers—‘in the arbitration commission were accepted, then wages would be much lower.’ They do not refer to the real issue here. The real issue here is the old arbitration commission, which I used to deal with as chairman of the Cane Growers. That is the real issue, because you have these ambit claims put in by the unions that are about 10 or 20 times more than they expect to get. What do you think the bosses are going to do? Do you think they are going to make an offer that is somewhere near it? Of course they are going to put their bid down low, and it is arbitrated in between. That was the way the system worked. And yet they are dishonestly trying to say that this would have been accepted because that was the offer that was made. It was the way the system worked, and that was what was wrong with the system. So let us get rid of that baloney that goes on about that particular issue.

I come from an area on the coast. I do not know where these people come from, because quite frankly they do not understand what goes on in business. How do you think we have shops open on a Thursday night, on a Saturday morning and on a Sunday morning if there is not flexibility in the workforce? The flexibility in the workforce is that the bosses and the workers come to an agreement. Many of the workers like the flexibility, I can tell you. In my area, they like the flexibility, because if they work on a Saturday or Sunday morning then they can take two days off through the week if they want to. I can tell you that many of them like to go fishing, to go surfing or to play golf for two days through the week. They take the flexibility because that offer is available to them.

This morning we saw some television. I found it very interesting. It showed Greg Combet and Premier Iemma. Greg Combet was saying to the nurses of New South Wales, ‘The federal legislation will reduce your wages 20 per cent,’ and Premier Iemma was getting up and supporting him. Who employs the nurses in New South Wales? Premier Iemma. And he is complaining because he is going to cut their wages 20 per cent. That is what they said they were going to do: cut the wages 20 per cent. They are under a state award. (Time expired)

See this speech in context