Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Hansard source

I seconded the motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition and I did so because this government has been derelict in its duty to look after thousands of workers in this country. Today, the Prime Minister's response to a question asked by the Leader of the Opposition as to whether he had sat down, as Prime Minister of this country, to talk to the senior management of Holden was that he had not. He did not because he, along with his front bench ministers, has shown no regard for the future of this company and the future of its workers since before the election and certainly after. The difference between what happened before the election and now is that there was a feigned interest, a feigned sincerity, for Australian workers.

In fact for four years we had the Prime Minister as the then Leader of the Opposition visit every workplace in the country that he could possibly find to stand next to Australian workers or, indeed, stand in front of them and use them as a prop, as he said that he was concerned for their jobs. Well, what we have seen since this government was elected is, time and time again, a government that is totally disengaged, or worse, a government, through the auspices of the Treasurer, that is willing to goad a company to leave this country. That is what we saw on Tuesday. On Tuesday, before any decision was made by Holden to leave this country, we had the Treasurer stand up in this place and dare that company to leave. Well, Joe, you got your way. The company is leaving this country, and that is a dreadful shame.

In the last two weeks what we have seen are, indeed, some very terrible decisions that will impact on Australian workers. Two weeks ago Rio Tinto made a decision that will, of course, affect up to 1,200 jobs in Gove by closing down alumina production in Gove, which will obliterate, socially and economically, Nhulunbuy. Last week Qantas announced a 1,000-job reduction; and, of course, yesterday Holden made its decision, which will have the direct impact of 2,900 workers losing their jobs in this country. But there is more to come as a result of Holden's decision. What the government has to understand is that, when a company as large as Holden leaves our shores, there are terrible consequences which go beyond the company's direct employees. Small and medium enterprises and the components industry, which need larger companies through which to create demand, are also in the firing line. So because the government—through the Treasurer—dared Holden to leave, this decision has been made by Holden.

This is a very important debate, and I think it is time we heard from the industry minister. The Minister for Industry has been prevented by this government from saying what really happened with Holden in the last few weeks. We want the industry minister to tell us what actions, if any, were taken by this government before Holden made its decision to leave the country. To date, the industry minister has been silenced. The Prime Minister, most likely the Treasurer, and, indeed, the Minister for Education wanted to enter this debate. But we need to hear from the industry minister. Clearly he has shown at least some sympathy for Holden and its workers. Unfortunately, it is clear that the Minister for Industry lost the arm wrestle; the Treasurer clearly prevailed. But it was not just the Treasurer's work; we should not give Joe all the credit. Clearly new ministers in this government have been leaking to the media that they had no interest in providing further support to Holden before the decision was made. This information was coming out before the decision was made.

Imagine this: you are Mr Devereux—who was responsible for Holden's decision and who was involved in discussions with Holden in Detroit—and you have just fronted the Productivity Commission and seen the Treasurer stand in the chamber and effectively dare the company to leave the country. But the company expected the government to co-invest in the company. The company would have hoped that, instead of ripping $500 million out of co-investment in the automotive sector, the government would have sat down with the company and worked out a way to ensure that not only would the company stay in this country but also that 2,900 people and their families would not be hit by as awful a decision as was made yesterday.

This Prime Minister must be censured because he has shown a total and callous disregard for workers in the automotive industry and because, unfortunately, there are potential adverse consequences for other workers in small and medium enterprises. The government talks about being the government for small business. But how many small businesses do you think will be affected adversely as a result of Holden's leaving the country? Hundreds or thousands of companies will be adversely affected, and the government does nothing. This is a government which has revealed itself as never putting workers or jobs first. This is a government that, when it comes to doing the work rather than just spinning out some lines, is not there to engage genuinely and comprehensively with companies—whether they be Holden or any other company.

Today the Prime Minister has feigned all sorts of sincerity. Today he is saying to this House that he is concerned about the workers. But it is a bit late now, Tony—it is a bit late now to be concerned for Holden workers after the decision has been made.

See this speech in context