Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on one of this government's key repeal bills which, if left in its current form and not revoked, has the ability to significantly hinder Australia's future economic viability, and trade and employment relations, both domestically and on an international scale.

The purpose of the Migration Amendment (Offshore Resources Activity) Repeal Bill 2014 is to repeal the Migration Amendment (Offshore Resources Activity) Act 2013, or ORA act as it is more commonly known. The ORA act sought to regulate the employment of noncitizens working in the offshore resources industry by way of a visa arrangement. This is regardless of whether they are actually working on a resources installation or not.

For those in this House who are not aware, the former government introduced these legislative changes in response to a Federal Court decision in May 2012, known as the Allseas case. In this judgment, the Federal Court ruled that noncitizens who work aboard vessels not within the migration zone are not required to hold work visas. This was part of an exemption in the Migration Act where vessels that are not being used for a resources installation are viewed in the act as being outside of the migration zone.

The intention of the ORA act was to remove this exemption with the overall aim to regulate the employment of overseas workers in the offshore resources industry and to impose Australian terms and conditions of employment, or rates of pay, to all noncitizens working in the industry. Noncitizen employees working on installations would therefore be required to hold and comply with a valid visa.

The ORA act was implemented by the former government and received royal assent on 29 June 2013. The operative provisions of this act, however, have not yet commenced—something I am sure industry and my colleagues who understand the former government's true intent for introducing this legislation can all be thankful for.

But let's not beat around the bush: the reality is that the ORA act was nothing more than an attempted power grab by the Labor party on behalf of their union brothers. It was an attempt to tie our resource projects up in union red tape. We can all sit in this place and tell ourselves that it must be because the former government wanted to increase the number of Australians who work on these offshore resource projects—something I must say I, of course, fully support. Who doesn't?

But when you get to the heart of the act, the truth is much simpler. The truth is exactly what we would expect from the former government—the introduction of legislation to this House to give more power to the unions who fund their political party.

While making this power play, those opposite of course did not think about the regulatory impact and additional implementation costs it would have on Australia's offshore resources industry or the significant impact it could potentially have on Australia's international investment and commercial viability. After all, those opposite introduced a mining tax which created these same uncertainties, so we cannot expect much more from the Labor Party.

Labor's only thought is to pander to their union mates, rather than thinking about Australia's economy, the viability of one of our key export industries or our international standing. If this act is not repealed, it will simply lead to duplication in regulation for the offshore resources industry and will hinder Australia's commercial viability for future investments. If the red tape surrounding our industries is considered too much work by international standards, then these investments will simply be made elsewhere. Australia is not the only country with offshore resource activity or minerals.

A key concern of industry groups is that offshore resource companies require highly skilled workers who are often sought globally. This is not because these companies do not want to hire Australian workers but because Australia simply does not have tradesmen and women with these skills, or enough of them. To keep the ORA act in place, we would therefore be forcing industry to adhere to additional visa enforcements for no other benefit than being able to confirm the status of a foreign national in the migration zone.

What needs to be understood is the fact that noncitizens who work on resource installations or who come to the Australian mainland to work are already required to hold visas. Noncitizens must also hold a valid visa to be immigration cleared when they transit through an Australian airport on their way to and from resource installations and vessels. Simply put, all workers entering Australia are still subject to stringent immigration controls—we aren't just letting people waltz into our country without knowing who they are, where they are from and their reason for entering Australia. All the ORA act does is duplicate this process.

It is also important to note that the ORA act would introduce a significant regulatory burden on the offshore resources industry in terms of the cost to comply with the ORA act and the associated visa arrangements. This is despite all indications being that the number of noncitizens working in the industry, who are not currently required to hold visas, is relatively small. One estimate has in fact put the total at approximately 2,000 people per year, with only a proportion of these people being in Australia at any given time, given the prevalence of fly-in fly-out workers in the resources industry.

According to Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration, known as APPEA, the peak national body representing Australia's upstream oil and gas exploration and production industry 'The oil and gas industry is a major driver of Australia's prosperity. In 2011-12 Australian LNG cargoes earned almost $12 billion in export revenue and put $29.4 billion dollars into the Australian economy.' They also said, 'In the same year, the oil and gas industry also paid more than $8 billion in taxation to governments across Australia.' 'With $200 billion worth of new projects now under construction, the industry's contribution is set to grow substantially, having generated more than 100,000 direct and indirect jobs across the Australian economy in 2013.'

Any legislation that has the potential to stymie investment in Australia's resources industry should therefore be of great concern to all who sit in this chamber, to industry, and to Australian taxpayers. It is of particular concern to me, given that my electorate of Durack accounts for some 85 per cent of Western Australia's resources sector. As many of my colleagues would be aware, Western Australia's resources sector generated the largest contribution to GDP of any state resources sector, at 53 per cent of the national resources industry value added or $89 billion, in 2011-12.

What my colleagues on both sides of this house may not be aware of is that the majority of these resource projects are in my electorate of Durack and, in particular, the Pilbara region, which contributed over $22 billion annually or some 75 per cent of total output in 2010-11.

Adjacent to the Durack electorate, we also have a number of offshore resource projects with the companies office headquarters predominantly based in the Pilbara region or in Perth. This includes but is not limited to Chevron's Barrow Island project; Woodside's North West Shelf; Pluto LNG projects; and Apache and BHP projects. Needless to say, these are major resource projects that require highly skilled and competent workers. In turn, it will not—or at least it should not—come as a shock to those in the chamber, that Australia substantially relies on the wealth that is, or will be, generated from these projects. However, it seems that, by implementing this act, those opposite managed to forget these important facts and were instead too focused on the narrow-mindedness of their union mates, who failed to see the big picture. They failed to see how an act such as this can hinder an entire country, all for the small benefit of being able to confirm the status of a foreign national in the migration zone.

On the scale of things, I think Australia's international competitiveness and ensuring that companies with offshore resource projects are able to continue hiring the skilled workers they need to get the job done safely and productively far outweighs the former government's unionist focus on industrial relations laws. Industry has consistently opposed the ORA act, with APPEA in particular highlighting significant economic and safety concerns as a result of the act's implementation by the former government. In their submission to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee inquiry into the act's repeal, APPEA in fact stated that:

In APPEA’s view, ORA 2013 has been formulated to service an industrial relations agenda rather than a skills or health, safety or environmental agenda. …

Extending Australia’s migration zone through ORA 2013 in order to extend industrial relations laws to vessels and workers undertaking highly specialised work for a short time only adds to the regulatory burden applying to offshore construction and operations with no palpable benefit.

It goes on to say:

The industry is truly global in nature and must compete for a limited pool of international investment capital. Investment lost from the Australian oil and gas industry will be redirected to overseas competitors. …

Even small delays can add significant costs to industry and, in turn, the Australian economy.

This sentiment was reiterated in submissions by the Australian Mines and Metals Association and, of particular note, in submissions by the Business Council of Australia, the Department of Industry, and in a joint submission by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection and the Border Protection Service. In fact, I think the Department of Industry summed up the former government's overall policy strategy—or lack thereof—for the full six years they were in government, in their review of the ORA act:

The ORA Act has created an unnecessary regulatory burden for the offshore resources sector that is significantly disproportionate to the original policy intent. Its application is unclear and confusing for industry.

Repeal of the ORA Act would support Australia's international competitiveness and encourage investment to maintain the economic benefits of a strong offshore resources sector.

I could not have said it better. The department also felt the need to re-emphasise 'the importance of appropriate consultation with industry on legislative changes that will have implications for them'. Apparently having a chat with the industry this act was not too high on Labor's agenda. But as we have already established, those opposite were only concerned with how the act could benefit their own coffers and that of the unions they represent, rather than the regulatory burden it would place on such an important industry for Australia's economic prosperity.

When we take a look at the former government's overall strategy throughout the six years they were in government, I think we can safely say that little thought was given to many of their policies. Let us look at the big picture. If those opposite cared about our taxpayers, as they claim, they would not have introduced the carbon tax. If they cared about our resources industry, they would not have introduced a fiscally unstable mining tax that generated little revenue. The fact that they spent predicted revenue from the mining tax before it was generated, let alone in the coffers, apparently was not an issue either.

The only thing that was generated under the former government was more red tape. That is why, on 26 March, the Abbott government marked a historic occasion when we held our first ever red tape repeal day. This effectively removed over 10,000 pieces and 50,000 pages of legislation and regulation, saving over $700 million in compliance costs. This repeal day was part of the government's overall strategy to cut $1 billion in red and green tape each year to improve productivity, investment and employment opportunities for all Australians.

You see, the comparison is clear—while the former government was focused on creating additional administrative and regulatory costs for pretty much every Australian business or industry across all portfolios, this government is focused on helping industry to grow and ensuring that Australia is best placed to take advantage of international investment opportunities as they arise and without delay. This will create growth and prosperity for our nation, something that Australians regrettably have not seen for the past six years.

By repealing the ORA act, this government will give the greatest certainty to business and individuals engaged in offshore resources activities. It would ensure that no changes are made to existing arrangements and would provide certainty regarding the relationship between the migration zone and the offshore resources industry, consistent with the Allseas Federal Court ruling. This is critical in a sector that is already facing growing global competition for future investment.

Reducing regulatory burdens and scrapping legislation that makes Australia and our key industries internationally uncompetitive, such as the ORA act and the mining tax, is the only way we can achieve this and is something that every member in this place should be fighting for.

I commend this bill to the House.

See this speech in context