Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Bass for her question. Of course, as members of the House are aware, the government was elected on the basis of its policy Forward with Fairness, a new workplace relations system for the Australian nation. The bill before the House, the Workplace Relations Amendment (Transition to Forward with Fairness) Bill 2008, is the first part of the government’s plans to ensure that fair, flexible and balanced workplace relations system. It would, of course, end forever the ability of anyone in this country to make an Australian workplace agreement, and we know that Australian workplace agreements have hurt Australian working families by taking away hard-earned pay and conditions. This matter is not only before the House but before a Senate inquiry due to report on 17 March. It is the government’s intention, when that Senate inquiry reports, to have the bill dealt with by both houses of parliament prior to the House rising before Easter. This will enable the bill to be proclaimed into law shortly after Easter and to deliver on one of the government’s important election commitments, to end the making of Australian workplace agreements.

The Australian people voted for this at the last election. They know what they want. The Australian government—the Rudd Labor government—knows where it stands. We stand behind our policy, Forward with Fairness. Unfortunately, the opposition have been unable to articulate a coherent position on Labor’s bill, and I am concerned that their dithering and vacillation will mean that there is a delay in dealing with this bill before the parliament.

Mr Speaker, can I direct your and the House’s attention to an article by Steve Lewis published on 23 February. In that article, Mr Lewis reported that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said that, when it came to defending Australian workplace agreements, her colleagues the member for North Sydney and the member for Warringah ‘went to water’. Having read that article, I thought that clearly the Deputy Leader of the Opposition stood firmly behind AWAs and firmly behind Work Choices. One would have to give her points for bravery. A bit like the Black Knight in Monty Python, she was going to fight on—that election loss was ‘just a flesh wound’. She was going to defend Work Choices. Then, last week, this belief that the opposition stood behind Work Choices and AWAs was further reinforced when the former Prime Minister gave a speech in the United States defending Work Choices and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition described it as an excellent speech. One could only conclude from that statement that they were going to fight on in defence of AWAs and in defence of Work Choices.

See this speech in context