Andrew Giles (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to join my Labor colleagues in voicing my strong opposition to the legislation before us, the Automotive Transformation Scheme Amendment Bill 2014. Before I go to the provisions of this bill, a bit of context is important.

As the member for Scullin, I am very proud that we have strong tradition of manufacturing in Melbourne's northern suburbs. As of the most recent data there were 1,100 people employed in motor vehicle manufacturing and components manufacturing residing in the Scullin electorate. I speak for those people in this place, as have my colleagues from Adelaide, like the member for Port Adelaide, or indeed my colleagues from Melbourne—those from the western suburbs, like the member for Gellibrand and the member for Lalor, or from the south-east, like the member for Hotham. I join them in standing up for our communities—proud manufacturing communities—for whom the automotive industry has been lifeblood and a source of great pride, as well as of good jobs that people could count on.

The other bit of context goes to the nature of work in Australia. I am reminded of Paul Keating's famous statement that:

When you change the government, you change the country.

That has, sadly, been prophetic since 7 September last year—most particular, in terms of the nature of work, as we are tracking to become a much less equal society. Good jobs—high-skill, high-wage jobs—are becoming harder and harder to find. This government is unconcerned at best; hostile at worst. I think of the way in which government members speak of childcare workers' push for professional recognition and professional wages in this regard. And while there are some campaigns in civil society—and I think of the Jobs You Can Count On campaign organised by the National Union of Workers but reaching far beyond that union's coverage, and building on the great work done by Brian Howe in terms of the secure jobs inquiry—Australia's government continues its ideological crusade to liberate workers, effectively into insecure working arrangements and insecure lives.

This is not confined to manufacturing. As well as shipbuilding at present, we see the terms and conditions in the jobs of public service workers under threat, notably. But, in recent weeks, the focus in this place from Labor members has rightly been on this government's lack of concern for manufacturing in Australia. In particular, the treatment of the automotive industry has, sadly, been a recurring theme. I have spoken in this sitting period in respect of the impact of the Korea-Australia Free Trade Agreement on this sector. This week, I joined many Labor colleagues in opposing the government's changes to the Fair Entitlements Guarantee scheme—a scheme of disproportionate importance to manufacturing workers. It is something we should think of when we think of the impact of these cuts on components manufacturers.

But, of course, these decisions pale in comparison to the huge cut that is the centrepiece of the legislation before us now. It is a companion piece, as I see it, to the Treasurer's shameful comments effectively daring Holden to leave last year—pushing industry out the door, having dared them to leave.

As Labor's candidate for Scullin last year, I was and remain profoundly affected by my visit to the Ford factory in Broadmeadows—a few kilometres to the west of the Scullin electorate—shortly after Ford's sad decision to cease its Australian operations. Together with the then minister, Greg Combet, and the members for Calwell and McEwen, I listened to proud workers explain what this industry meant to them. It was so much more than just their jobs.

A few days later, I met with automotive students at the wonderful outer-northern Trades Training Centre, Peter Lalor Secondary College. These impressive young women and men had a much stronger sense of their futures than what I had at their age—futures that, a year on, have been dramatically confined through no fault of their own.

I thought of these workers and these students when I spoke in this place for the first time. I spoke then of Melbourne north's proud tradition of manufacturing and of my hopes for an exciting future. Hope is still there, but we need a government, and Melbournians need a government, prepared to rise to this great challenge, not walk away.

I also spoke then of the importance of considering the social consequences of the policy choices governments make. In this, I was pleased to be criticised in the opinion pages of The Australian by Gary Johns. This view was said to be naive and romantic, I think. I ask government members: what is the alternative? Do government members really believe they can divorce themselves from the human consequences of their actions? What will they say to the workers at Ford, to the young men and women at the Peter Lalor Secondary College and to those in components manufacturers in suburbs like Thomastown and Epping?

Unemployment in Victoria, as I speak, is unacceptably high. We are in a jobs crisis in Melbourne—it is as simple as that—with the promise of much worse to come as a direct result of this government's ideological war on manufacturing. This legislation before us will contribute to this, make no mistake. The greatest impact of the collapse of our once great automotive industry will be felt in Victoria. We face the loss of 100,000 jobs—a huge impact on gross state product. There is a likelihood that job numbers will not recover until well into the next decade.

It is more than just the raw numbers when it comes to this jobs challenge we face. I join my colleague and friend, the member for Hotham, in raising the question of the quality of jobs in the context of this debate. And this makes the rhetoric of liberation so offensive. For most of us—and I am pretty sure all of us in this place—what we do defines who we are. This is also the case for every autoworker I have spoken with. It is tragic that government members will not listen to their voices in this debate.

Of course, the challenges facing Australia's automotive industry did not begin with the election of this government. But this government has, through its actions and, sometimes, through inaction, killed off this vital industry. At the conclusion of his second reading speech, Minister Macfarlane spoke of providing certainty. Well, the government that he is a member of has done that now. Having committed before the election to make the industry—in the words of the then opposition leader—'flourish', the government has made certain the death of automotive manufacture in this country, and now it is hurrying it along.

The Automotive Transformation Scheme Amendment Bill amends the Automotive Transformation Scheme Act 2009 in order to give effect to the government's $500 million cut to the ATS over the 2014-15 to the 2017-18 year period, announced as part of MYEFO. The bill also has the effect of terminating the scheme as at 1 January 2018, cutting a further $400 million from the scheme—a budget announcement.

This scheme was, of course, a scheme that Labor introduced in 2009 to encourage investment and, importantly, innovation in the industry. The scheme has provided assistance in the form of co-investment to firms with the production of vehicles and engines, and for investment in R&D and plant equipment. It is a scheme that arose from a proper process—through a review of Australia's automotive industry by the former premier of Victoria, Steve Bracks. In 2009, Senator Wong, who then delivered the second reading speech in support of the legislation, said:

Car making is a cornerstone of Australian manufacturing. It makes a critical contribution to Australian employment, skills, innovation and exports. The automotive industry directly employs more than 52,000 people. This scheme will help to secure these vital jobs as the industry faces intense pressure in the short term as a result of the global economic downturn, as well as the long-term challenge of modernisation and renewal.

She noted also that the automotive industry is also one of Australia's top export earners—despite the effects of the global economic downturn—with exports of $5.8 billion in 2008. I note that this scheme was starting to do some important work, and it particularly touched on the Scullin electorate. I think of the impact on Manumatic in Epping in particular in this regard.

Before the last election, Labor announced A New Car Plan for the 2020s—a vision for the future, to keep making cars in Australia and to keep good jobs in the Australian automotive industry. This included a new program of $300 million per annum to support the transformation of the industry to attract new investment, support research and development and design and engineering from January 2016. Labor's commitments would have seen the motor vehicle producers commit to new investments in Australia and a secure jobs future for thousands of auto manufacturing workers—jobs that are now on the line. Of course, as I said a moment ago, the then Leader of the Opposition said before the election, 'I want to see car-making survive in this country, not just survive but flourish.' I think most people would think that this would equate to a pledge of support for the car-marking industry, but as has so often been the case, this is a government that said one thing before the election and has done quite the opposite in government.

It is an understatement to say that. A bit over a year since the Prime Minister made that commitment things have changed dramatically, with predictable, and tragic consequences. As others on the Labor side of the House have already pointed out, and those opposite refuse to acknowledge, none of the above was promised before the last election. I think that what has happened in terms of manufacturing has been a tragic story: the conceit of the Productivity Commission review at a time when the manufacturers needed a commitment to maintain operations; the decision in MYEFO, which this legislation gives effect to; the refusal to commit to Labor's co-investment plan; and then, worst of all, the campaign to undermine Holden, culminating in the Treasurer's cajoling statement given in this place.

And, of course, on top of all that and adding insult to injury, they cut $5.1 million from vital skills and training programs for auto workers. We all know how important that is for the workers in our electorate at this time.

Yesterday, I heard the member for Corangamite's attempt to pretend that the government had a jobs plan, when she encouraged people to fill out a petition about jobs. It is as simple as this: a petition is no substitute for a jobs plan. Let's imagine the scene: a worker made redundant from the Ford factory in Geelong, facing huge uncertainty about how his or her family is going to pay their bills. But wait! They have the opportunity to sign a petition from the member from Corangamite about jobs! This is what the coalition does when it does not have a jobs plan. It has no idea what these people are going to do when the factories and the components manufacturers close. None. And they are, in effect, through this bill, hurrying these closures along.

I gave the minister some credit in referring to certainty earlier in my contribution. But one important aspect of this legislation is these cuts; this broken promise has changed the basis on which decisions have been made along the supply chain. I note the warning given by Holden managing director Gerry Dorizas, who said in The Age on 14 August:

Suppliers have invested based on the ATS to break even. They needed this kind of subsidy and at this particular time they’re in dire straits, …

This is the reason why we’re actually very focused on the supplier base because if that happens then nobody will be able to produce cars, …

It is compounding the certain loss of jobs in manufacturing by hurrying these along.

I note the bizarre comments by the minister reported in today's Australian Financial Review, where he is quoted as saying:

I did put in $4.3 billion into the automotive industry, but I'm not sure for what outcome to be perfectly frank, …

The outcome under Labor—under a government that cared—was jobs. Jobs that were high-paid, highly skilled and, most importantly, secure. They are being replaced with either no jobs, or low-paid, low-skill, insecure jobs. It is the worst possible outcome for these employees, their families and their communities. The minister went on to describe the government's approach as 'very tough love'. Well, I think that I can say that workers in automotive are not feeling any love. And yet, there is an issue with the rationality of this decision, as well as its morality. Due to government's behaviour, welfare payments and lost tax revenue from an industry shutdown are projected to exceed $20 billion, and it will be more than 10 years before the economy recovers from the underlying hit to GDP.

As I have said earlier, the more than 1,100 people in Scullin currently employed in motor vehicle and motor-vehicle-part manufacturing deserve better. Decision-makers should always have foremost in their minds a deep appreciation of what job loss means to individuals—the ways in which lives are reshaped for the worse. But this government cannot help itself; it consistently refuses to help the Australian people in need. The auto industry faced challenges. Everyone knows this, but the fact remains that there is not a single car anywhere in the world that is not supported in some way by the government where those cars are made. Australia's automotive industry was, of course, the least supported in the world.

These governments, and until recently the Australian government, supported industry because of the significant and pervasive multiplier effects of having a vibrant and robust manufacturing industry. This government has chosen to walk away unilaterally from these workers for no benefit—for purely for ideological reasons. Again, who could forget the sad spectacle of the Treasurer daring the auto manufacturers to leave Australia? I will not and I am sure that the workers in Scullin will not either.

On that note, I echo the words of the member for Throsby, who asked in the context of the debate over the Fair Entitlements Guarantee, 'What is it about automotive workers that makes this government hate them so much? When members opposite called for support for the agriculture sector which has been affected by drought, they had Labor's support, as they should have. And yet all we see is hypocrisy and not reciprocity when it comes to the auto sector. This government knows, as the opposition leader said this morning, the price of everything and the value of nothing.

See this speech in context