Robert Oakeshott (Lyne, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I rise very briefly to put my views on the record and to say, ‘Oh, what strange bedfellows indeed’. For all the posturing, for all the positioning, for all the impassioned speeches, I see very little difference in the positions of both sides of this chamber when we look at the foundation principles behind the movement from a scattered, state-based industrial relations system to a national industrial relations system.

Rather than to say, ‘A pox on all of you here,’ it is to congratulate everyone here in recognising the movement of business and the union tradition to a future, hopefully, within Australia and the Australian workplace that is one of a united working environment where those foundation pillars are adhered to and supported by both employees and employers. Those foundation pillars represent a national scheme, and for a lot of reasons I hope the term ‘Work Choices’ is one we can put on the shelf for political reasons and for a whole number of reasons. Let us hope the term itself is dead other than being a very important High Court case that recognises the importance of the role of the Commonwealth under the Corporations Law. I hope the move towards a national scheme is supported by both sides of this chamber, with a foundation pillar not only in industrial relations laws but in occupational health and safety laws as well. The range of structures that we currently have in place for businesses, in an increasingly global business environment within Australia today, is an absolute dog’s breakfast.

Another foundation pillar is the streamlining of an award structure. Whilst I have feedback from my communities about concerns with the hospitality award and the detail of the streamlining of the hospitality award, fundamentally as a foundation principle the streamlining of an award structure in Australia is something I would have thought both sides of this chamber would have strongly supported. I would have thought support for such a move would be seen in both sets of policies. Whether from a business angle or a union angle, fundamentally having a minimum set of principles in place in a fair work set of rules is something that I would have thought all members of this chamber would support. So, with respect to the 10 commandments from the government of the day, I wear that as a mandate issue. If there is a change of government sometime in the future, by all means I wish them good luck in looking at their own set of principles and their own set of minimum standards. But, fundamentally, those three key principles—moving to a national scheme, streamlining awards and a having set of 10 commandments, if you like, in setting some national minimum principles in the workplace—are all good, solid policy for the future of this country.

I endorse the comment made on a news bulletin this morning by the Leader of the Opposition, where he said the only point of difference was this issue of 15 or 20 employees as a definition of small business. That is what it has come down to.

See this speech in context