Rowan Ramsey (Grey, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

From the outset let me say that I think all people in this place would be in favour of flexible working arrangements that allow people to care for loved ones and for people they have responsibility for. But some of us maintain that such arrangements should be made in a mutually beneficial way to both the employer and the employee. Broadly, when we considered this matter at committee level, we of the opposition—that is me, the member for McPherson and the member for Aston—agreed with the government members in so much as we asked for the deferral of this bill until after the report on the Fair Work review and then the government's response. You always run the risk that, if you alter too many dials on the stove at once, you will end up with your cake completely collapsed and you will not really know why. We do concur with the government, but we were keen to make some comments that we do not necessarily agree with the thrust of the bill put forward by the member for Melbourne.

This continues the path in recent years of moving more and more onus onto the employers with more and more compliance and giving them less and less rights in their own workplace. In particular, part of the bill states that an employer should have to show that their denial of more flexible working arrangements provided serious countervailing business concerns. The question, firstly, arises: what are 'serious countervailing business concerns'? Secondly, just how tough a line is this to reach? In fact, we believe that this disempowers employers and places more and more priority on employees. The best workplaces are where you have mutual agreement. The thrust of the bill is: do we have more stick and less carrot rather than the other way around? We were keen to make that point.

As I tour around my electorate and speak to small and medium business, which I do on a regular basis, they are change fatigued and they are really struggling at the moment. We read about it daily within the press. There are the modern awards which business has to adjust to, as well as the Fair Work Act, the nationalisation bills on the OH&S, the paid parental scheme, the impacts of the high dollar and the low consumer confidence. Retailers are also dealing with a flood of online shopping. I have rarely seen the business community so despondent as they are at the moment. I pick up the national figures and they tell me and the government tells me that the economy is travelling fine, yet business after business is saying that we have never had it so tough and we are putting people off. Somewhere along the line those two arguments will meet and there will be some kind of reckoning where there will be a readjustment of figures. It is impossible to believe, when I talk to my business community, that things are as well and as rosy as the Treasurer would tell us.

This bill by the member for Melbourne, I am sure, is brought forward in good faith but I think it demonstrates once again how the Greens have little understanding of what makes business tick and who supplies the jobs in the real Australia. In fact, if we overload the business community, if we tell them that they have no rights within the workplace then, in fact, we discourage the next round of entrepreneurs, the next round of business people and the next round of people who actually supply the jobs for Australians. As I said, we concur with the government's response in that the bill should be deferred, but we believe that this bill requires serious consideration and some adjustments before it should be passed.

See this speech in context