Don Randall (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Well, they used their asset sales to prop up the bottom line and not actually to invest in the future as this budget does. But it is no accident that the Australian economy is as strong as it is today because the Howard coalition government has put the fundamentals in place which will see a sustained, strong future. It would be quite terrible if the opposition were ever to get into government and get their hands on this absolutely stellar economy, which is brimming full of confidence and brimming full of economic opportunity and the wealth that has been created thereby.

We currently have inflation under check; that was not done before. It is below the target rate set down by the Reserve Bank. Home mortgage interest rates are at historic lows. Unemployment is at a 32-year low. And business confidence is at a 32-year high. So what does that say about the state of the economy? The state of the economy is so healthy that we can be proud of it, and we want to share in it. But the opposition, in their whole time in this place, have done everything they can to thwart the government’s ability to put the economy in the state that it is in now. They have voted against every measure that we have taken to reinforce the strength of the Australian economy—and yet they would try and benefit from it. So that is the challenge.

One of the most unbelievable measures that the Australian Labor Party are now proposing—should they ever get the opportunity to sit on the treasury bench—is that they wish to wreck the Australian workforce as we know it today. One of the reasons we are in this particularly successful state is that the government’s industrial relations reforms have given Australia an economy which is the envy of the modern world. It is the envy of the modern world because of its flexibility and its ability to respond. We have taken away the rigid shackles that the Australian Labor Party, with their union mates, had placed on it previously. And these shackles stopped the workforce being able to respond in a timely way.

The Australian workplace agreements that this government has put into the workforce have been so successful that now the Australian Labor Party would destroy them. You would have to ask: why would they want to destroy them? Mr Beazley said he would tear them up; he had on billboards around my electorate: ‘We will tear up Australian workplace agreements.’ You have now got the Leader of the Opposition, Kevin Rudd, going to Western Australia, trying to talk to business and the workers over there, and saying, ‘We’re listening.’ On the plane the other night Ms Gillard, the opposition workplace relations spokesman, was sitting opposite me. She was going over there to talk to Western Australian business, workers and the state government. What was the response? She did not cut through at all.

The West Australian newspaper exclusive entitled ‘Carpenter warns Rudd against ending AWAs’ by Andrew Probyn states:

Alan Carpenter has warned that Federal Labor leader Kevin Rudd’s intention to rip up Australian Workplace Agreements could have a detrimental effect on WA’s resource sector and the Australian economy.

The article continues:

... the Premier said that AWAs had not only become integral to the mining industry but were “almost the norm”.

The Premier said he had told Mr Rudd and his deputy Julia Gillard to be mindful of WA’s industrial relations climate when formulating their alternative to AWAs.

The article also states:

... Carpenter was clearly worried that Labor’s policy would hurt the WA economic juggernaut.

This was reinforced by Business Council of Australia President Michael Chaney, who said that the ALP’s approach was a worrying ‘massive re-regulation’ of the workplace that threatened prosperity.

So that is the challenge. The Australian Labor Party have taken a very dangerous view that will destroy AWAs. AWAs are strongest in Western Australia, and in Western Australia there are only 15 House of Representatives seats. When there are 150 seats and only 15 of them are in Western Australia why would you consider Western Australia? I am going to explain shortly with the figures I have here why it is a dangerous endgame for the opposition to be playing. Their success at becoming the government at the next election largely hinges on their mathematical equation as to what may happen in Western Australia. But will they get it wrong? On the night of the election all eyes will be peering west two hours after the polls close to see how we are going, because at the end of the day Western Australia is going to play a big part in the election. I suspect the 16 seats that the Leader of the Opposition needs will be very tough, because if we gain seats in Western Australia—which is the current polling in Western Australia, by the way—his mathematical equation will be thwarted.

We know that AWAs nationally cover about 8.4 per cent of the Australian workforce and 22 per cent of the workforce in Western Australia. So that puts it into context. The common-law contracts, which are the alternative form of individual agreements, cover 32 per cent of the workforce. Collective agreements, which are favoured by Labor, cover 41 per cent of the workforce. So, obviously, not everybody chooses to be on an AWA. I need to make this clear because there is some very dishonest campaigning in the Australian media, supported by the union hierarchy, to get the Labor Party into government. This is their last gasp to be relevant; they need to make sure the Labor Party wins this election because the Australian industrial landscape is changing forever. So they are willing to put $100 million into ads. The dishonest ads say things like, ‘Sign or resign.’ We know that is illegal. The case on McLeod’s Daughters was of a 16-year-old having to sign an Australian workplace agreement. That is illegal. If you are under 18, you cannot sign an Australian workplace agreement unless your parent, guardian or someone represents you. The lies that have been perpetuated in the media have to be addressed. The fact is, if anyone tells you to sign or resign, the Office of Workplace Services will deal with them because it is illegal. So you have a choice—and what is wrong with choice? This is a government of choice. We want to give you a choice: private education or government education, private health or the normal public services offered throughout the health system in Australia. So we offer a choice, but the Australian Labor Party do not want to.

That is the context in which we find ourselves with Work Choices. The fact is that the unions are meeting—I can give you an update today, Mr Deputy Speaker. The unions are meeting in Western Australia today, and it was reported on the ABC:

W-A’s top union leaders will hold an emergency meeting today to discuss how to boost numbers in the wake of the latest figures showing a dramatic drop in union membership.

In fact, in Western Australia I understand that they are down to about 15 per cent, because people are actually happy negotiating an individual agreement which gives them more salary and more flexibility; and, if they wish to trade off any terms and conditions—and I emphasise the word ‘wish’, because they are not forced to—of their employment for a higher salary, they are doing that. So the unions are being dealt out of the game. Is it any wonder that they are having a crisis meeting? Their membership is falling away. People are voting with their feet. They are saying, ‘Why would we belong to something like that that wants to re-regiment us and put us all in a box and not allow us to achieve our ultimate potential and therefore our ultimate pay?’

The WA branch of the Australian Nursing Federation, which was part of that ABC report today, says that it has ‘bucked the trend’ because it has almost doubled its membership in five years. Federation secretary Mark Olson said:

… other unions should take note and start offering more relevant services like computer training and legal workshops.

“Those who think our services are non-traditional are really relics of the past, they are jurassic,” he said.

Why would Mark Olson be saying this, when he is from the Australian Nursing Federation in WA? Because it is the only nurses federation in Australia that is not affiliated with the Labor Party. As a result, they are serving their members and, because they are serving their members, they are growing their membership. So there is a case in point. Actually Mark Olson is in the House today, and I hope Mark is able to get through to a lot of members and explain to them how they are looking after their union membership and what they are doing for their nurses.

The fact is that AWAs in Western Australia have done an enormous amount of good. In fact, people on AWAs on average in Western Australia are earning $200 a week more. What an outstanding achievement: on average, they are earning about $200 a week more. Western Australia contributes 34 per cent of the exports or GDP, gross domestic product, of this country. They only have 10 per cent of the population. Out of 54,200 days lost to strikes last year, only 900 were from Western Australia. That is because the workforce over there has 22 per cent of people on AWAs.

To that end, it is interesting to note that an editorial in the West Australian newspaper on 21 April had the headline: ‘Rudd’s policy on IR changes will damage his chances in WA’. It is unbelievable—it says:

The unions are also behind his plan to abolish the controversial Building and Construction Commission, set up by the Howard Government to put a stop to the outrageous abuse and exploitation indulged in by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union on building sites.

No one owes more gratitude to the commission than Planning Minister Alannah MacTiernan. Her career was on the line because of the CFMEU’s disastrous disruption of the Perth to Mandurah railway project until the commission put a stop to the union’s antics.

Michelle Roberts as Minister for Housing and Works knows her reputation would be severely damaged if the CFMEU resumed its disruption of Perth building sites and she has raised serious concerns about the proposal to abolish the commission.

That a Labor Minister is prepared to publicly voice her concerns is an indication of how unwelcome these IR policies are in WA.

We would be back to the no ticket, no start regime that the CFMEU and other rogue and so-called militant unions had in Western Australia until Work Choices came in. In fact, we saved Alannah MacTiernan’s bacon on the Perth to Mandurah railway; it was stalled because of militant union action, and Alannah MacTiernan is a beneficiary.

Not only are AWAs growing in the mining sector; one of the great upsides of Work Choices is that women in the workforce have been huge beneficiaries of a more flexible workplace. As has been reported:

Figures compiled by the Australian Bureau of Statistics show the number of stay-at-home mothers to be at its lowest level on record ... the proportion of women aged 25-34 who are at home raising children has fallen from roughly one in four ... to about one in five ... A similar drop has occurred among women aged 35-44, from 23.3 per cent in 1999 to 19.7 per cent last year.

…            …            …

However, near full employment and a trend towards greater workplace flexibility have made it easier for women with children to re-enter the workforce, if they wish. As far as the higher number of mothers participating in the workforce reflects the removal of barriers to employment for those wishing to work, the statistics are to be applauded. Flexibility that gives parents the ability to negotiate workplace arrangements that work best for them is essential if Australia hopes to address the twin challenge of a skills shortage and the ageing population.

I could go on, but the fact is that women have a greater opportunity to involve themselves in the workforce because of Work Choices. For example, a woman in Waroona in my electorate has negotiated an Australian workplace agreement with a local recreational centre because it allows her flexibility with picking her kids up from school and with school holidays and allows her to earn more money by trading off unnecessary entitlements.

To put it in context, as I am running out of time, Western Australia has the largest number of AWAs in Australia. By the way, the abolition of the Australian Building and Construction Commission would be disastrous. I had a call this morning from the ABCC because I reported that at a Goodwin construction site in Forrestfield the CFMEU were trying to enter and were coercing people to join a union. The fact is that during a second visit Joe McDonald and the troublesome Vinnie Melina, or Walter Vincent Melina, from the CFMEU tried to stand over people and the ABCC was able to run them off and call the police. McDonald is not even allowed on work sites, but he still tried to go back there again and heavy them to join a union. It just shows that it is working. These blokes can get on with their jobs and not have to be intimidated at work.

In Western Australia, the number of AWAs in Canning is second only to the number in the electorate of Kalgoorlie. Kalgoorlie has 39,118 people registered on Australian workplace agreements in an electorate of about 80,000—unbelievable. In fact, since Work Choices began there has been an addition to the original figure of 10,706. I run second in the electorate of Canning. Before Work Choices there were 23,500 AWAs in Canning; there are now 29,890—nearly 30,000 people. Nearly one in three people in the Canning electorate are on AWAs. And you don’t reckon I will be running hard on this in my electorate!—as will the member for Kalgoorlie and everybody in Western Australia.

To put it in context, in the electorate of Brand, which Mr Beazley is vacating, 27,500 people are on AWAs. In Cowan, which I am convinced we will win because of the retirement of the very popular Graham Edwards, there are 19,400 people on AWAs. In Curtin there are 23,000, in Forrest there are 14,000 and in Fremantle, Carmen Lawrence’s seat, there are 28,000 people on Australian workplace agreements, nearly as many as in Canning. It just shows that the member for Griffith cannot take it for granted, because there are 4,500 people on AWAs in his electorate, and he is talking about ripping up their contracts. Hasluck, which the Labor Party think they have a chance to win, has 22,300. It goes on: O’Connor, 11,000; Pearce, 14,000; Perth, 16,000; Swan, 14,500—and Mr Wilkie is surviving on something like 60 votes. You don’t think the candidate in Swan will be running hard on Australian workplace agreements! I could go on.

The fact is that, in all of these electorates, unemployment levels have been brought down massively. In my electorate of Canning, in 1996 the unemployment level was 9.1 per cent. Today it is 4.5 per cent—unbelievable. Do you think there is any correlation between Australian workplace agreements and the level of employment? People are choosing with their feet to get involved in Australian workplace agreements. It is at the dire peril of the Australian Labor Party if they go over there against the wishes of the Premier of Western Australia and Labor ministers and say, ‘We are going to tear up your agreements.’ I can assure you that from now till the election—and it is already happening in my case—we will be encouraging and working with all candidates and all those involved in the election in Western Australian electorates. We will be telling people that, should you get a Rudd-Gillard leadership, your economic wellbeing and your mortgages will be on the line. The fact is that you will get less pay because, as I said, people on AWAs are on average $200 better off a week. So those second houses that you might have bought as an investment or the money you have been putting away to send your kid to a better school are going to be torn up by the Australian Labor Party. It is an absolute disgrace. The people of Western Australia should know about it. It is a growing trend in Australia that the flexibility that is given to Australian workers allows them to make choices about their future. The Labor Party have done everything they can to destroy it. This country will be worse off if we have the Rudd-Gillard leadership tearing up AWAs in this country. (Time expired)

See this speech in context