Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Health) Share this | Hansard source

Despite the change of Prime Minister, the very serious threat to cut penalty rates remains on the table as part of this government's agenda. It is very concerning that the new Prime Minister has said that one of the first things on his agenda is slashing the penalty rates of 4.5 million hardworking Australians. Unilaterally cutting rates will hurt Australian workers. Hospitality and retail workers will be hit first, followed by nurses, paramedics, aged-care workers and cleaners.

Australia currently has one of the lowest rates of wages growth it has experienced over the last 25 years. Many people are relying on penalty rates to pay their bills and keep their heads above water. Indeed the McKell Institute found that taking away these penalty rates and this income would have a devastating effect on the standard of living of many people and that it would impact both the financial and emotional wellbeing of many people. Many people would be forced to work longer hours, tighten their belts and give up on small comforts if their penalty rates were unilaterally scrapped. There are thousands of retail and hospitality workers in my electorate who rely on penalty rates to pay their bills, so it is very concerning that scrapping penalty rates is at the top of this government's agenda.

The Prime Minister and indeed many people on the other side have suggested that the present system is working well and that there is nothing to see here. I mean, that is what the Prime Minister says in question time every time he is asked about penalty rates—that the current system is working well. Why is it, then, that he keeps signalling outside of this place, when workers are not necessarily listening, that he thinks that penalty rates are a problem? He has called it the seven-day economy—everyone should work every day as the same and no-one should receive penalty rates. He has also flagged that he will continue to look at the Productivity Commission's report that unilaterally suggests taking away penalty rates.

There is a robust system in place. There is a system that allows workplaces, workers and their representatives, the unions, to sit down and negotiate more flexibility around penalty rates—such as a higher rate of pay in exchange for lower penalty rates. Then the independent umpire, the Fair Work Commission, looks at that to make sure that workers are better off over all. That is the way the current system works. Certainly, we support the current system, because it was Labor that put it in place, after years of the Howard government trying to dismantle the independent umpire. It has been an important element—I would say the most important element—of our industrial relations system. The Howard government did try and dismantle that independent umpire. We had to work hard to put that independent umpire back in place, and it is working well.

I am glad that the Prime Minister, in question time, says that it is working well. Why is it, then, that he, his ministers—whether they be cabinet ministers or in the outer ministry—and his backbench continue to signal that penalty rates are a problem and that they need to be unilaterally addressed, slashed and cut? That is what it means when you say that you want to address penalty rates. If it is not being addressed by the independent umpire, you want to address it. It just means cuts—cuts to penalty rates and cuts to people's pay and conditions. It is very concerning that we hear this from this Prime Minister, despite his cooing and reassuring in question time. We know that, when he is out there talking about penalty rates, his agenda is about slashing penalty rates, and it is very, very concerning.

So it is time that the Prime Minister made an unequivocal statement backing the Fair Work Commission, backing the concept of enterprise bargaining and ruling out any way to unilaterally attack penalty rates in this country. Because workers rely on them; workers rely on these penalty rates. And it is a shame that, to date—despite the Prime Minister trying to pretend that he is reassuring Australian people—there is an agenda that the Prime Minister has. He needs to abandon it.

See this speech in context