Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Migration Amendment (Temporary Sponsored Visas) Bill 2013. On what is now possibly the fourth last day of this 43rd Parliament the government is attempting to ram through this migration legislation, a contrived solution from this Labor government to a nonexistent problem. The coalition has serious concerns with this bill because it adds to the burden of regulation, obligations, compliance and enforcement on employer sponsors using the 457 visa program. This bill is the culmination of a union and government campaign to discredit the program and demonise foreign workers for political gain.

The 457 visa was introduced in 1996 and is the dominant component of Australia's temporary skilled migration program. In general, this visa allows a business to sponsor and employ someone from outside Australia in a skilled job. People holding this visa can work in Australia for up to four years, bring their family with them and travel in and out of Australia as often as they want. They pay their own way, including health care, and they do not access welfare.

People holding this visa can work in Australia for up to four years, bring their family with them, and travel in and out of Australia as often as they want. They pay their own way, including healthcare, and they do not access welfare. Fundamentally, the program is designed to provide a quick response to fluctuations in demand for skilled and semi-skilled workers where such demand cannot be met by the Australian workforce. Therefore, temporary skilled migration is vital to the efficient operation of the labour market, delivering significant benefits to the Australian economy.

Since its introduction the 457 visa program has grown in use and proven to be highly effective in meeting skill gaps in a number of industries for large resource or infrastructure projects. Approximately 70 per cent of 457 visa holders are in professional or managerial occupations, while 30 per cent are in trade, technical and clerical positions. According to the Department of Immigration and Citizenship's Subclass 457: summary reportfor 2012-13, as at 13 April 2013 there were 108,810 primary 457 visa holders in Australia. This figure is up by 20 on April 2012. This represents less than one per cent of Australia's workforce.

I strongly welcome the contribution of migrants to this country. On this point I note that the 457 program is not about what country people happen to come from but rather about what skills they can offer and what they can contribute to Australia. In 2012-13 some 21.1 per cent of applications granted were for citizens of India, 19.6 per cent from the United Kingdom and 8.3 per cent from the Republic of Ireland, while many countries from Asia, including the Philippines, China, South Korea, Japan, Nepal and Malaysia make up a significant component of 457 workers. These figures reflect the fact that Australia is a very attractive place to come to work and that people from all across the world want to contribute to the Australian economy and to Australian society.

The bill amends conditions in four areas: first, it introduces new labour-market testing; second, it amends rules relating to sponsor obligations and undertakings; third, it establishes powers of authorised inspectors; and, last, it extends the period during which a 457 worker can find new sponsored employment.

The most concerning aspect of this bill relates to the reintroduction of labour-market testing. At present, skills shortages are based on inclusion of an occupation on the Consolidated Skilled Occupation List, CSOL, which is updated annually by DIAC, drawing on advice from Skills Australia. These changes will require employers to provide evidence of labour-market testing, including information about their efforts to recruit Australian workers, relevant labour-market research trends, expressions of support from relevant Commonwealth or state authorities and any other evidence determined to be relevant. The actual period of labour-market testing required is not clear in this bill but will likely be variable, depending on the occupation.

These changes represent a significant regulatory impost on employer-sponsors. However, the Labor government has neglected to provide a regulatory impact statement, because the Prime Minister's office granted an exemption based on unspecified exceptional circumstances. This is despite the fact that labour-market testing requirements will undermine the very purpose of the 457 program to rapidly fill temporary skills shortages. Adding draconian measures such as labour-market testing to visa approval processes will add significantly to 457 recruitment lead-times and costs. At the very least, a full analysis of such potential impacts of this bill must be clarified in a regulatory impact statement, let alone in a full Senate inquiry as proposed by the coalition.

The Australian Industry Group, the Business Council of Australia and the Migration Council of Australia have together called this, 'unwarranted legislation which risks penalising all employers, their employees and skilled migrants, as well as undermining investment, skills transfer and development, and broader job creation. In fact, in the DIAC document on the 457 program produced earlier this year, obtained by the shadow minister for immigration under freedom of information, labour-market testing is not suggested not even mentioned. Clearly, the department does not believe that this is a worthy proposal—and neither does the coalition.

The strongest disincentive against abusing this program is that the costs involved in recruiting an overseas worker are significantly higher then when recruiting an Australian worker. It simply does not make rational economic sense for an employer to spend considerably more money to bring in someone from overseas, when the Labor supply already exists in Australia to do that same job at the same level.

That does not mean that the system is perfect. I have heard from constituents who are concerned that their employer might be discriminating against Australians in favour of workers on 457 visas. It is absolutely critical that those concerns are reported and that DIAC identifies if an employer is abusing the 457 program. However, while individual cases have been identified, the Labor government has not in any way demonstrated why they cannot be handled within current safeguards. For months this Labor government has claimed that there has been widespread rorting of 457 visas, yet it has failed to produce any real evidence that it exists. This bill is therefore based on a false premise. In May this year, the minister publicly claimed that there were in excess of 10,000 cases of illegitimate use of 457 visas. He later admitted that he was merely 'making a forecast' and admitted that he did not have an exact or precise figure.

In fact, we need only look at what the Prime Minister, the Treasurer and previous ministers for immigration have been saying on 457 visas. In 2011, the Prime Minister claimed

I believe we've got the visa settings right particularly with short-term 457 visas.

The then minister, the member for McMahon, publicly declared:

… demand-driven migration is delivering migrants effectively to the regions where they are needed—exactly how the 457 visa program is supposed to work. And anyone who tries to tell you the 457 visa program is not working, needs to take another look at the facts.

As recently as 20 January 2013, only five months ago, the then minister said:

The 457 visa program is designed to address genuine labour shortages that cannot be met from the Australian labour market and we believe we have this balance right

What we see with the measures in today's bill, however, is this government inventing a problem. This Labor government has concocted a cynical, political ploy to demonise 457 workers to the detriment of the Australian labour market and the Australian economy. Those who know what is actually happening on the ground have pointed out to this government that there is absolutely no evidence of problems or rorting. The minister cannot produce an inquiry from the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, because such an inquiry does not exist and there has been no reason to hold one.

Business groups, including representatives from the Australian Industry Group, the Business Council of Australia and Migration Council Australia, have all disputed Labor's claims and have condemned the Prime Minister for demonising 457 skilled migration visa holders. They have called on parliament to reject this bill unless, as they said, 'the government provides hard evidence to back up its claims of widespread problems with the 457 program'. In fact, this government's own advisers have said that such evidence does not exist. This includes Michael Easson, chairman of the Ministerial Advisory Council on Skilled Migration, who said:

I do not believe that there is any credible evidence that the management of the 457 visa program is out of control …

Demographer Professor Peter McDonald, a member of the government's advisory council, has labelled the rhetoric coming from this government as 'nasty'.

Since 2007-08, as a result of Labor's mismanagement of the budget—now approaching $300 billion of gross debt—the government has cut resources for compliance work in DIAC, including 457 monitoring, by over $20 million, or 30 per cent. This government has reduced monitoring visits to employers by two-thirds, and the number of employer-sponsored formal warnings has also dropped by two-thirds. The track record of this Labor government demonstrates that it has not been serious about supporting the safeguards already in place, and we must treat the measures in today's bill in that context.

The shadow minister for immigration has therefore proposed an amendment which proposes that consideration of this bill not be concluded until we know all the facts about why we should consider this bill in the first place and what ramifications it will have should it be passed. This means that three processes must take place: firstly, that DIAC completes a full research report on the true incidence and nature of abuses and non-compliance within the 457 visa program, in comparison to other programs, to substantiate the requirement for the measures; secondly, that consultation by DIAC take place with industry and other stakeholders on the impacts of the measures contained in the bill; and, thirdly, that the government produce a regulatory impact statement related to the proposed labour market testing regime, as required by the Office of Best Practice Regulation. Only when these actions take place can this parliament truly assess the merit of this bill.

The coalition's position on 457 skilled migration visas is simple, clear and consistent. We recognise the critical importance of skilled temporary migration to the Australian economy and the well-being and living standards of all Australians. The 457 skilled migration visa program must be well-managed, providing rapid access to skilled workers not available in the Australian labour market and with strong compliance action to ensure high standards of program integrity. The coalition would never support the use of 457 skilled migration visas at the expense of Australian workers, and would not tolerate any employers who try to abuse the system. We must recognise, however, that skilled migrants have made a vital contribution to the building of our nation.

The coalition will not support this bill and is seeking referral to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee. The coalition has always been consistent on 457 visas and will be strong on policing our immigration laws on our borders, in the community and in the workplace.

See this speech in context