Laurie Ferguson (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I do not know what is not factual, but anyway. There is another slant in the opposition's position, of course—not only the issue that you build up resentment among ethnic groups at the fact that they might have fewer migrants because the government believes in protecting youth apprenticeship and traineeship rights, tries to protect Australian jobs and tries to defend people's conditions against the way in which 457 workers can be victimised and forced to have reduced conditions. We know that the opposition's position on this matter was articulated quite a while ago by the Leader of the Opposition when he said, 'Under a coalition government, 457 visas won't just be a component but a mainstay of our immigration policy.' So there is a clear strand of disinterest in the conditions of Australians in the opposition philosophy in this whole field.

We know that historically there has been the absolute shemozzle with international students. We saw a situation where it was no longer about education; it was about immigration. When the previous government decoupled the need to return to the homeland and come into Australia on the basis of Australian-gained credentials, they made it a policy that essentially people would stay here once they gained Australian credentials, and we know what that led to. We know that—on the basis of a man murdering his wife in Westmead; another person, a close family friend, kidnapping a child in Melbourne; and workers allegedly being murdered in the Riverina by their employer—it led to a very sensationalistic attack upon this government in the media overseas. We know that the current government had to clamp down with regard to international students to make sure that every college around this country was recertified because of the shams that were developing in the training sector, and everyone was required to be inspected in a year at their place of work. Once again, there is a studied disinterest in how those students—desperate and financially in a very bad situation—would work for anything in this country, undermining Australian conditions.

Finally, again this week, after the Federal Court's decision of May 2012 in the Allseas case—when there was clear lack of government power to protect workers in the offshore resources industry and there was a situation where people were not being protected—the opposition showed that their lowest priority is to protect the interests of Australian workers, to protect Australian training and to make sure that people have fair conditions. So once again they are running around and trying to find the most bizarre ways that they can allege that this is about racial attacks on people and that the Indian community is being persecuted. That is the kind of rhetoric over there.

The other thing they are relying on is whether there are 10,000, 8,000 or 6,000. The reality is—and the Australian people know this very clearly—that 457 visas are being utilised by employers to undermine conditions. Fairfax Media on 6 June, with very little work, came up with 200 examples of 457 and 187 regional visas being manipulated. That included 29 Filipino workers who had to repay loans at 45 per cent interest rates to recruitment and migration agencies; 80 Indian workers duped into paying $4,000 for a Melbourne cleaning course worth $1,300, which they believed would get them jobs and a working visa; and another 100 Indian workers who paid up to $40,000 for promised regional visas and jobs that never materialised. They are trying to say over there that this is not a problem. I say it is.

For my own part, in the last few weeks I have had to write to the minister about a bank in Sydney where people have had contrived job descriptions aimed to make sure that they could come into jobs where they had no qualifications whatsoever. The description of the job was meant to make sure that relatives within this bank could come into Australia and do totally different jobs. A member from Western Australia earlier today referred to an inquiry some years ago in regard to Australian skills. He talked broadly about my involvement in that inquiry. He forgot to mention the extensive evidence we had about exploitation of Filipino workers in the abattoirs et cetera in Queensland.

I want to cite today a lawyer who has persistently been writing to this government—to this minister and the current minister—about what he sees as a very experienced immigration practitioner, in the field and on the streets, with regard to what is happening in this country every day of the week with the abuses of 457 temporary entry visas for foreign workers. His latest bit of correspondence today says: 'The various schemes which I referred to in my previous communications remain, and I can say without exaggeration that daily new clients attend to my office who are either victims of scams or who ask if I am prepared to assist them with a sham 457 visa transaction. Almost uniformly, amounts ranging from $40,000 to $50,000 are quoted as fees being charged by unscrupulous employers and agents to facilitate these visa transactions, with higher fees charged by Chinese entrepreneurs. One problem that I as a lawyer have is, of course, that information is given to me under legal professional privilege and this prevents me from passing information given confidentially unless the client has formally authorised it. Usually persons involved in these transactions are intimidated for a variety of reasons and are therefore reluctant to pass on the information to the authorities.' He had written previously: 'As a practitioner, I report that on an almost daily basis I interview potential applicants for 457 or RSMS visas, many of whom indicate that they have been introduced by an agent or through a friend to a potential employer sponsor who indicates a preparedness to act as a sponsor provided a substantial sum of money is paid as an "inducement". The practice appears to have grown exponentially as people realise that other options for residents have diminished. Sums of money ranging from $20,000 to $50,000 are regularly mentioned.' Those figures, of course, went up recently with regard to what is reported in the last correspondence today.

Another correspondent said, 'I now summarise some of the ongoing abuse schemes which I witness almost daily: persons setting up through intermediaries businesses which then act as employer sponsors—many of these businesses have spurious backgrounds but have been cleverly structured to appear quite legitimate; persons legitimately brought down on 457 visas to work for unscrupulous employers, who fail to meet their obligations under Fair Work Australian legislation. I am aware of the increased operations of the Fair Work Ombudsman but nevertheless in the absence of mandatory monitoring scams frequently go undetected.

Further to point 2, it appears, regrettably, to be common for employees to self-fund their 457 sponsorships, even though this is contrary to the regulatory provisions for the 457 scheme. Again, such payments are usually carefully hidden by unscrupulous employers and agents.'

What we have there is evidence before a committee, an investigation by the Heraldand union exposes. We have lawyers who are in the first line of this activity, renowned migration agents in Sydney and lawyers saying it is necessary. We note that the growth of these visas is extensive. Over the last year there was a 20 per cent growth to 100,000. If we look at a different period from June 2010 to May 2013, there was a 56 per cent rise. What do we note? We note the concentration of these visas in very unskilled sectors such as accommodation and food service and retail, places where there is falling employment.

We have a situation where much has been quoted about the work of the Migration Council and their survey. I would particularly stress some aspects of that analysis. Fifteen per cent of employers said that they have no difficulty finding suitable labour locally in Australia and yet they sponsor employees from overseas under the scheme. They say they can get somebody in Macquarie Fields or Liverpool or Glenfield but for reasons that we can only guess at they prefer to import labour for those very same jobs. That is why I had a complaint from a woman last week that, despite Australia's low unemployment rate of 5½ per cent compared to the US 7.8 per cent or the European wide average of 12 per cent, in Liverpool she sees young people idle and alienated, with no work and nothing to do. I wonder why.

When I see new building sector training opportunities in my electorate at Ingleburn TAFE, a new section opened at Macquarie Fields TAFE with regard to the fitness sector—an industry some of us might not be interested in but which has jobs—and Eagle Vale High School bringing in a number of training options for students, I know things are being done by this government to recover the training deficit under the Howard government. The reasons that we are importing so much later labour relate to a total failure by the previous government to train people as well as in the mining sector.

What are those opposite opposed to? What is so dreadful that this government is undertaking action with regard to the situation with the 457 visas? They are upset that we are increasing the number of inspectors to 300 to go out there for Fair Work Australia to look at what is happening in the real world. They are attacking the fact that the government wants to reinforce conditions in the industry. They are also opposed to labour market testing. It is dreadful apparently that employers perhaps should look around and see if they can find suitable Australians for a job. They are very upset about that proposition.

They are also very upset and emotionally disturbed by the fact that the government is trying to enshrine the required content of existing sponsorship obligations and to create new obligations relating to meeting training requirements, the term of the sponsorship approval, preventing the transfer of people, the charge or recovery of certain costs from sponsored visa holders and restriction of on-hiring arrangements, where people come here with one employer and five minutes later they are down the road with somebody else. They are seemingly concerned that the migration regulations would be extended from 28 to 90 days to allow people to find a second employer where they legitimately lose their job and need another employer.

We have had many speakers refer to what is occurring in Canada. Those opposite say that this is only happening in Australia and that it is due to this dreadful Labor government that is trying to crack down on foreign temporary workers; it is not happening anywhere else, it is just a political attempt by the union movement and it is all directed by the ACTU. When we look around the world, unfortunately, this does not hold true. There have been previous quotes of what is happening in Canada, one of the most conservative governments in the western world. The Harper government, on all practical standards, is among the most reactionary.

If we look at the United Kingdom, there is a bipartisan attitude. When Prime Minister David Cameron announced the need to do something about the undermining of skilled migration by the large numbers coming in and the lack of controls, did Ed Miliband, unlike these people—(Time expired)

See this speech in context