Richard Marles (Corio, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Border Protection) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Migration Amendment (Charging for a Migration Outcome) Bill 2015, which deals with the very vexed area of temporary work being conducted in this country by non-citizens who are in Australia on visas which provide for temporary work rights.

This issue perhaps has come most into light in recent weeks and months with the case of 7-Eleven, which was something investigated by Fairfax and Four Corners, which found, across the 7-Eleven chain in Australia, a systemic underpayment of its workers across something like 620 stores. The investigation found that there were thousands of international students—people who were here on that visa, with a work right associated with that visa—who were being exploited in the course of their work. It led to the resignation of the chairman of 7-Eleven in Australia, Russell Withers.

There have also been reports undertaken by Four Corners this year, in respect of persons on 417 visas in the food picking and packing sector, in respect of some of Australia's largest companies. There have been reports of people being routinely harassed and assaulted at work. It was also alleged that women were being targeted sexually, with women being propositioned for sex and asked to perform sexual favours in exchange for visas. All these reports and allegations are deeply concerning. It is why Labor was keen to establish, in the other place, an inquiry into the nature of temporary work in Australia and ways in which we can deal with that.

Visas which provide for work rights obviously have an important role to play. Section 457 visas, which are the subject of this bill and this amendment, clearly have a role to play within our economy where there are skills gaps in the labour market and where it is essential that, in order to give rise to more Australian jobs, we bring in expertise from beyond our shores to fill those skills gaps and allow enterprises to continue. That though, is the point of a 457 visa. Student visas have their purpose as well. Student visas facilitate what is a really important educational export industry in this country, and, obviously, if a student is coming from overseas to study in Australia it is important that they be given the opportunity to work, to sustain themselves, while they are studying, just as any citizen would do if they were studying. Hence student visas provide for those work rights. But it is important that the study comes first and that what those visas are about is facilitating people's study in this country. Working holiday visas also have a role to play. Indeed, I went to Britain on the British version of a working holiday visa between the time I left school and when I went to university. That was a fantastic opportunity for me to experience life in the UK and to work there as part of that. That is an experience that we offer to thousands of people coming to Australia, and in the process that assists our tourist industry.

But what is important in respect of all of these visas is that they are confined to the work which they are meant to do and that they not be used and ultimately abused as a form of cheap labour in this country. I think what underlies all of this ought to be a fundamental principle that, in Australia, you should work under Australian conditions of employment. That needs to be the focus of all of our efforts in this regard. The kind of exploitation that we have seen reported previously in the media is exploitation that we seek to stamp out. Indeed, this bill before us today takes a step in that direction.

I would commend the government on instigating, earlier in its term, an independent review of the 457 system of visas. It was chaired by John Azarius. This, I think, was a really good piece of work. We would not agree with every one of the recommendations that came out of it, but there were a number of ideas which were raised as part of that review, and I understand that one of those ideas is the substance of this legislation. Some of the other really significant points that were made in that review were the suggestion of establishing a tripartite ministerial advisory council—one that consists of government, the union movement and the employer movement—which would be appropriately resourced, well resourced, to oversee what skills gaps there are in the Australian labour market and in that sense be the custodian of where it is appropriate for 457 visas to be issued and where it is not.

Another recommendation coming out of the Azarius review was the proposition of placing a training levy on 457 visas that are granted. That makes sense in two senses. One is that it increases the barrier associated with a 457 visa so that it is not used simply as an avenue for cheap labour. Secondly, it is creating a levy which is directed to precisely the issue that 457s are there to try to address, and that is where there are skills gaps in the Australian labour market.

The Azarius review also went to a range of measures that looked at the question of better enforcement—better enforcement of our labour laws and more streamlined coordination between our industrial system and our immigration system so that there can be better working between the agencies to ensure that there is enforcement of visa conditions but also enforcement of our industrial conditions so that we can rightly say that people who are working in Australia work under Australian conditions of employment.

To go to the specifics of this bill, this picks up one of the recommendations of the Azarius review, namely that it be made unlawful for a sponsor to be paid by visa applicants for a migration outcome and that this be reinforced by a robust penalty and conviction framework. In that context, the sponsor often will be the employer of the person. This is an employer sponsored visa program. Of course, the visa applicant in these circumstances is the employee. Having a situation where it would be unlawful for the employer in this context to effectively charge the employee or to receive a benefit from the employee for a migration outcome is a very appropriate step to take, and we absolutely support this bill in taking that step.

Having said that, we would also welcome, though, as my speech alludes to, the prospect of others of the measures that were raised in the Azarius review and indeed other ideas that are around in this space being taken up in legislation as well. To that end, I would like to foreshadow with you that in the other place—not here but in the other place—the opposition will be moving amendments to this legislation to include other measures which seek to improve the framework that exists in relation to those noncitizens who are engaged in temporary work under visa conditions in Australia.

I want to go briefly through the amendments that we will be putting in the Senate. The first is seeking to apply this bill, this amendment, not just to 457 visas but also to persons on student visas and persons on working holiday visas.

The second is to make clear that, for the penalty regime which is outlined in this bill, which can in some circumstances apply to a degree to the visa applicant, the employee, themselves, that not be able to occur in circumstances where it is clear that the visa applicant has been coerced by the sponsor or a related third party into offering, making, asking for or receiving a benefit or, similarly, if the visa applicant has been the subject of human trafficking, forced labour or slavery offences under the criminal code. In other words, if those people are clearly victims of this situation, they ought not to be the subject of a penalty.

The third set of amendments that we will be moving in the other place is to increase the level of penalties for sponsors in respect of these breaches of the immigration act.

The fourth is to institute a new measure which would say that any person in this country who is working under a student visa or a working holiday visa cannot have an ABN. That is to say that if they are working under those visa conditions then they need to do so under a contract of employment.

The fifth set of amendments will deal with the question of protections for those who are whistleblowers in this space. There was some amnesty provided in respect of those at 7-Eleven who brought forward the cases of exploitation that occurred, but it is often a very difficult situation for people who are on a visa, who may well feel that they are putting themselves at risk in terms of their ongoing ability to maintain their visa in this country, to come forth and raise issues such as these. It is important that there is a robust system of protection for them.

The sixth set of amendments will be to require the minister to table an annual report about the operation and the impact of provisions which are introduced as part of this legislation. And the seventh will be to enable registered employee organisations—unions—to be able to undertake prosecutions for breaches of the Migration Act in this space.

Those amendments will be presented to the Senate. I thought it appropriate as an opposition that we outline those here so that both the government and the public are aware of the way in which we will approach this. As for our dealing with this bill in the House today, we absolutely support this measure. It is an important step forward. It is one of a number of steps forward that we need to take in this space, and we commend it to the House.

See this speech in context