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

The Shipping Legislation Amendment Bill 2015, essentially, destroys any preference for Australian flagged and Australian staffed boats operating around our own coastline. It establishes a single-permit system, giving access to ships of any nationality to work the Australian coast for a 12-month period and significantly extends the period of exemption for domestic wage standards for foreign ships.

What epitomises the attitude of the administration is the fact that they even went so far as to delete revitalising Australian shipping as an objective of Australian shipping policy. That shows you how determined they are to destroy these jobs and worsen the very poor state of the industry itself.

It is essentially about destroying the 2012 initiatives of the former government. After consultation with a wide variety of reference groups, they came down with a policy to try to save this industry with tax reform, to encourage investment in contemporary and more efficient ships, to increase productivity, including a zero tax rate and seafarer tax exemption, to establish an Australian and international shipping register to augment our international fleet, a streamlined licensing regime to provide clarity and transparency for long-term planning, and to establish clear boundaries around the agreed dimensions of foreign vessels in our coastal trade and the establishment of a maritime workforce development forum.

The previous speaker rhetorically asked, 'Why would they do this?' Quite frankly, I am not surprised they ask this. When we look at the attitudes of people in the Turnbull administration, we find the comment by the trade minister. When he was pressed in regard to saving Australian jobs under the Chinese trade agreement he said, 'It's complicated.' That was his defence for not giving it priority. He is a repeat offender, because on another occasion he said that jobs in Australia was 'a trivial issue'. Sorry, I have misquoted him. He said it was 'just a statistic'. In fact, it was the Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development who commented that jobs were a trivial issue. The former Minister for Industry and Science, Mr Macfarlane, who was profoundly thanked by the incoming Prime Minister for making room for some other people in the ministry, spoke of the threatened jobs at BlueScope, the thousands that look like they might go. He reassured us with the very comforting comment that it would not be as bad as the car industry. So we see the attitude of this government.

The Australia Institute has estimated that 93 per cent of these jobs will disappear and that 88 per cent of the financial gains to be made would come from the replacement of Australian workers with overseas workers, often in flag-of-convenience ships, whether they are from Panama, Liberia et cetera. That is of no disquiet to this government. It does not concern them that SeaRoad, a local freight company, would say that it is reconsidering a $100 million investment in purchasing cargo vessels. It would not concern the government, despite the fact that they denied it, that Australian operators in the tourist industry are being told: 'The best way forward for you is to give up. Don't try with Australians. Just replace your staff with overseas workers.'

The context of this, as we heard yesterday in this parliament, is that it is no worry that seven per cent of our workforce are people here on temporary work and student visas. Seven per cent of all Australian jobs are held by them. The fact that, for the foreign million in this country, rates as low as $4 an hour are proffered for jobs is of no concern!

However, they do have some cheerleaders behind them. The IPA are a renowned influence on the government. While Labor is attacked for being xenophobic racist and is said to be going back to the White Australia policy of 1900 because we believe that trade agreements should not be utilised to smash employment conditions in this country or to displace our workers, the IPA—a very close associate of the government in regard to this bill—commented through Mr Chris Berg on 26 May 2015. Do you know what his concern about our shipping industry was? He asked:

Are Chinese registered vessels allowed to ship goods between Brisbane and Sydney? Under highly regulated conditions designed to dissuade them from doing so.

That is the priority of the IPA. They are not concerned with the tax revenue that comes from Australian workers. They are not concerned with the retail money that flows when people are employed in this country. They are more concerned that Chinese vessels are restricted in their ability to move between Brisbane and Sydney.

Chris Berg had another worry—pilotless crews in a coastal environment which is world renowned are finding it difficult to operate under the current conditions. He further bemoaned:

Liberalisation is always accompanied by the bleatings of those whose privileges are being taken away.

Australian jobs are being thrashed, families are losing their breadwinners and shops are not able to rely on those dollars coming through the shopping centre each week. They are 'bleatings' to be ignored!

We have seen the real threat of this on many occasions. We have had the MV Apellis, a Greek owned, Panama registered boat that arrived in WA, wages having been unpaid for eight months, the steward being paid $200 a month, having not enough food to make the trip to Indonesia and food and water being rationed out. We saw the way in which they intended to expand this with the Alexander Spirit. The Australian crew of 36 was thrown out by Caltex and Teekay Shipping. They alleged that they were going international and that is why they had to do it, but the workers—most of them still out of jobs two months later—were to find that that very ship was coming back to these shores.

We can go internationally to see what this government intends for Australian workers. In September of 2009 in Ceuta, the Spanish enclave in Morocco, the Turkish owned Rhoneas in the French river—with a crew of 14, was understocked for the whole trip and had to be detained because their boat needed urgent hull repairs. The workforce, which was there for five months, was 'penniless and forced to rely primarily on the handouts from Ceuta port authority and local charities'. Some $233,000 in wages was held, and three years later it remains unresolved. That is the destiny and the reality that this government wants for the Australian coastal line.

From 2001 to 2010, according to the ILO—that is not the international union movement but the International Labour Organization—1,600 workers were abandoned around the world. It has been estimated in regard to flag-of-convenience vessels that 62 per cent of the workforce labours for over 60 hours a week and 27 per cent labours 12 to 15 hours a day. This is the way in which this government hopes to attract the boats to our shores and decrease the cost of cargo going in and out. This is what they believe is a solution to what they see as too many costs.

Many people have mentioned the Jones Act of the United States, which is designed not only to protect employment but also—from a defence point of view—to ensure that ships are constructed with American content. No more than 25 per cent of the crew are allowed to be foreign. It is all right for John McCain to say that it is antiquated law that has for too long hindered free trade, but unfortunately he does not seem to be making much of an impact around that.

What we are clearly seeing here, on one of the largest coastlines in the world, which carries a significant volume of trade, is a very strong attempt to minimise the working conditions of people in this country. The International Transport Workers' Federation has dealt very strongly with this question of flags of convenience. We see a situation where Panama, Liberia and others basically give these corporations a free hand to undermine people's working conditions around the world. It is interesting to note that six per cent of Liberia's overall income comes from these registrations.

In conclusion, I note that it is highly predictable that the government would do this. They have no concern with 14½ per cent of the population being unemployed or underemployed. The fact is that the government are nowhere near their target of creating one million jobs. Despite the occasional reference to the creation of 325,000 jobs, at the same time, so many jobs have been disappearing. We have a recipe here for low wages, poor onboard conditions, inadequate food, lack of proper rests, evasion of international laws, minimal registration fees, exploitation of the global labour market and minimal taxes.

I do not think anyone would argue that the 2012 reforms have been a significant success story; there has been minimal time for them to operate. The national interest is a very low priority for this government. Employment in this field and the possibility for people's children to go into this field are low priorities for this government. It is all ideologically driven, with elements such as the IPA saying, 'Let it all hang out! It is a dreadful, worrying thing that we haven't got the Chinese along our coastline, being able to travel to all our ports.'

See this speech in context