Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

What an extraordinary question time—again the government denied the link between pay and safety when it comes to roads and what has been decided by the tribunal. Let me remind the government what the Australian Productivity Commission report found in 2016. This is a government that is happy to support the Productivity Commission when they recommend cutting penalty rates but is not willing to support the Productivity Commission when they say there is a direct link between pay and safety. The cherry-picking of this government is extraordinary.

And that is not the only report that linked pay to safety on our roads. There was another report, by Jaguar Consulting, in 2014. There was the National Transport Commission report in 2008. The Productivity Commission recognised in 2014 and 2016 that RSOS will result in a '10 per cent to 18 per cent reduction in the number of crashes'. This is on page 86, if government members would like to check it out. Perhaps they should read up on it before they make a statement in this House stating otherwise. The road transport industry has the highest fatality rate of any industry in Australia, with fatality rates 12 times higher than the average for other industries. That was on page 6 of the Productivity Commission review. Let me just state that again: '12 times higher'.

Let's be real about our roads network. It is the workplace of Australian truck drivers. It is the responsibility of this place to do everything it can to ensure that safety is paramount on our roads, yet all the government plans to do—what they believe will improve road safety—is just build roads. That is not enough. It is not enough to just build roads. You also have to look at who is driving on our roads and the pressure on our truck drivers on our roads. In my previous statement I listed example after example of trucking accidents in my electorate. The Bendigo electorate has a vast network of highways. It is important that we have tribunals like this that are independent of government, that are making orders to ensure that we have safe freights and road safety.

Since it was created in 2012 the tribunal has made two rulings that have been evidence based, and which people have had the opportunity—like with the Fair Work pay commission, like other tribunals—to have an input into. That is the purpose of an independent tribunal. The first ruling was to mandate 30 days minimum payment for transport workers. The second was to set a minimum rate of pay for owner-drivers. Both these rulings were made after many years of consultation and investigation by the tribunal. The tribunal acts like any other tribunal that has been established by this parliament. It acts to consult. It acts to make decisions. It is independent of this place. What we have seen, though, in the last few days, if not weeks, is this government completely trash that independence.

I agree with the member for Chifley when he says that this is a stunt. This is a government that continues to chop and change its position on this issue. In consideration in detail upstairs in the Federation Chamber, I asked the then minister for transport: 'Can the government today rule out scrapping the RSRT? Can the minister commit to supporting the RSRT?' That was on 18 June 2015. What the minister at the time, the Deputy Prime Minister, said was: 'We haven't got any plans to get rid of it.' Less than 12 months ago, this government said, in consideration in detail: 'We haven't got any plans to get rid of it.' It cannot get any clearer than that about how this government chops and changes their minds over and over again, trying to save their own jobs.

But the minister is not the only one who continues to chop and change his position on this particular bill. When the current Deputy Prime Minister was in the Senate he also stood up and defended the creation of the tribunal. He said that he did not have a great problem with it. He did not see a problem with it. Whilst he was voting against the bill he did not really have an issue with it, and did not think it would have a big impact. What has happened? What has changed? Again, this is a man who is desperate to save his own job, who is putting a scare campaign out there, who is denying the purpose of this. He is misleading people in the Australian community that this is about ensuring every hour that is worked is paid and that there is a rate of pay that everybody receives. This is a government that is not committed to road safety, despite all of their rhetoric. If they were, then they would listen to report after report that directly links pay to safety.

These are our roads, and fatalities on our roads are higher in this industry than in any other industry. Yet what we have is a government that is not serious about road safety. If they were, they would be working with the opposition on how to improve the tribunal going forward and how to ensure that we continue to improve road safety. Instead, what we had was a stunt where they just want to abolish it. That just demonstrates how narrow-minded they are when it comes to this legislation.

It is now crystal clear that, when this Prime Minister gets a decision from an independent umpire that he does not like, he will just trash it. What happens next? What happens if the fair pay commission recommends a pay rise for some of our lowest paid workers? Will he recommend abolishing the fair pay commission? What happens if Fair Work Australia does not follow his advice and cut penalty rates? Will he abolish Fair Work Australia? It is not fair on people working in this industry, some our lowest paid workers that this government will not stand up for.

We know that our roads are not always safe. And we acknowledge that a lot needs to be done to help improve road safety. What this tribunal was established to do was to try to ensure that at least our truck drivers are not being forced to race by supply-chain pressures. This ensures that drivers are not undercutting each other because of pressure from big clients.

When I have spoken to people in my electorate about this issue, they have been clear. They want the undercutting in the industry to stop. They want people to be paid for every hour that they work. Even if you do a backload or a return trip just to cover the cost of petrol, you have undercut the next truck driver who would have done that.

My family actually has a history in trucking. My uncles both worked in long haul, and so did my cousin until his wife begged him to give it up and take on a job that was more of a local run, where he would be home every night, because she was pregnant and worried about what was happening on our roads. Every family that has truck drivers in the family has stories of worry because of the pressure that is being put on them through the supply chain. Earlier this year I met one driver who has been to 52 funerals of workmates—52 people involved in the trucking industry who have lost their lives. Find a person in another industry who has had to attend 52 funerals of workmates.

This government is not interested in road safety, despite its rhetoric. They are not interested in the reports that link pay rates to road safety. They have whipped up a fear campaign amongst the trucking community that, quite frankly, is just unfair. (Time expired)

See this speech in context