House debates

Thursday, 6 June 2013

Bills

Fair Work Amendment Bill 2013; Consideration in Detail

4:05 pm

Photo of Scott BuchholzScott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

The intimidation shown there is consistent with the intimidation that you get throughout the union movement. Minister, you have the power to repeal this one section of the bill. There are good businesses out there that have invested in locations on site where the unions can go and meet. The unintended consequence of this schedule in this bill means that there is no right of refusal for the business owner to be able to say, 'I have provided that to you free of charge; take that space.' There is no right of refusal for the business owner, when the union delegate comes in and says: 'I don't want that spot. I want to speak to the guys in the lunch room.' I will stand corrected, Minister, if that is not the case and then I will take that with humble pie. But, if it is an unintended consequence, I do implore you and the crossbenches to reconsider your support for this bill, because it is fundamentally wrong. There are other provisions in which union guys can get their message across.

Minister, in an earlier response you said that everyone has the right to be a union member. Exactly, but everyone also has the right not to be a union member if they so wish. It is unthinkable that if I were in a coffee shop or a public locality—as when a telemarketer rings my house and asks me to join, I have the right to say no. Under these provisions the unintended consequence is that there will be no provision for those people that wish not to be part of a union to remove themselves from the company or the union delegate on site unless they physically get up and leave the lunch room. This is unfair, Minister.

Comments

No comments