Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

I find it interesting that coalition members cannot bring themselves to change their perspective and position in relation to the marriage equality plebiscite but are quite happy to change their position on this package of bills, the Income Tax Rates Amendment (Working Holiday maker Reform) Bill 2016 and cognate bills, to that which they campaigned on in the last federal election. The coalition are very flexible and malleable when it comes to their positions. Their position on this has been a complete farce and shemozzle ever since it was announced in the May 2015 budget. And yet they have the chutzpah and gall to demand that we roll over and pass this legislation without a Senate inquiry.

That mob opposite could not get themselves together for 16 to 18 months to work out what their position was. We had a situation where, I think it was in the adjournment speech last Thursday, the new member for Murray demanded that we pass the new legislation straight away, before we even had a debate on the second reading in the chamber today. This legislation is particularly important position because there are 272,400 young Australians unemployed. There is a youth unemployment rate of 12.8 per cent. Labor supports the integrity of the 417 visa, 462 visa and 457 visa schemes. It is indisputable that backpackers make an important contribution, including in my electorate, in the rural parts of Ipswich and also in the Somerset region. They are particularly important.

I am going to concentrate on issues that are germane to this debate, particularly on those that relate to my shadow portfolio of immigration and border protection. The legislation covered by this cognate debate deals with issues relating to backpackers and the 417 visa scheme. We have seen in the media reports of hardship, exploitation and sexual harassment happening, sadly, in relation to people working on these visas. The overwhelming evidence of exploitation of these vulnerable workers dictates that any changes to the working holiday visa scheme must offer better protection. The government has spent a long time talking about these issues in this chamber and within the Liberal and National parties, but very little of that time has been spent talking about the need to protect workers—particularly in the horticulture and cattle industries and the like, and in regional and rural areas—who are being exploited and taken advantage of. We saw evidence of that in A national disgrace: the exploitation of temporary work visa holders, the report of the inquiry by the Senate Education and Employment References Committee in March 2016.

We are of course going to send this to a Senate inquiry because it is particularly important for this legislation. Among other things, the bills require the Commissioner of Taxation to give the Treasurer for presentation to parliament a report on working holiday visas, including statistics and information derived from a register that is being established; increase to 95 per cent the rate of Australian superannuation payments for working holiday makers; and also reduce the visa application charge by $50. It is important that we get this legislation right. It is important that the Senate look at this legislation.

Through registration, businesses can be listed on the Australian Business Register as an employer of working holiday makers. If the business fails to register for listing then working holiday makers will be taxed at the higher rate of 32.5 per cent, effectively cutting their day-to-day pay packet until the end of the financial year when the working holiday maker can lodge a tax return and access the 19 per cent tax rate.

Many working holiday makers travel around the country. They invest their hard earned money in our small rural towns and in big tourism hubs. We think that is particularly important, because it is a driver of economic growth. I know it is important in my own electorate. The Migration Institute in their submission to the Education and Employment References Committee inquiry made the point that 'student and working holiday visa holders are often very reliant on any income they can get for basic living costs.' I am concerned that working holiday makers, in order to determine the level of tax they will pay, will be expected to log-in to the Australian Business Number web site to check whether their employer is registered.

The bills give the Commissioner of Taxation the power to share information with the Fair Work Ombudsman for the purpose of ensuring that an entity is compliant with the Fair Work Act. Why is that important? It is important because we have seen some egregious breaches of industrial relations legislation enterprise agreements. We support the sharing of information between agencies, because it is important to protect vulnerable working holiday makers. The commissioner will report annually to the minister about the employment of working holiday makers, including statistics, information about the regions and sectors working holiday makers are employed in and other information derived from the employment register.

The Fair Work Ombudsman is empowered to investigate cases that are taken to it, but working holiday makers need to have the knowledge and confidence that their issues will be taken seriously and investigated and that the Australian government will act in their best interest. I will be very interested to hear, as part of the Senate inquiry process, what the unions and other stakeholders have to say about exploitation in these industries.

We saw the Four Corners program 'Slaving away: the dirty secrets behind Australia's fresh food' and a subsequent media report by Smart Company, who said:

The Four Corners … report put a spotlight on a number of labour hire companies that have been found to be taking advantage of young foreign workers with limited English skills. Some of the workers, many of which are on 417 working visas, worked on farms and factories for as little as $3.95 an hour and worked 22 hours a day, while others alleged they had been sexually assaulted and harassed.

Even News.com published a story, 'Dark industry of backpacker exploitation', that detailed the very confronting experiences of three working holiday visa holders. They also are very confronting. One of them said that her employer would not allow them to drink water and put a drunken old man in a 12-bed female dorm. Another said that he was exposed to poisonous materials and he observed women being sexually harassed. He said that he had seen a meal thrown at a young girl. There were sexual remarks and unwanted advances, and they had asbestos lying around and wanted the girls to chuck it in the bin. It was simply not good enough.

The exploitation of workers is not only limited to unsafe work practices; working holiday makers have also experienced financial hardship as a result of misleading employers who take advantage of young desperate workers seeking a second-year visa. One person, a young woman of 22 years of age, said:

Wanting a second-year visa should not strip you of basic rights in the workplace.

Sham contractors target desperate overseas workers and then take advantage of 417 visa workers who want a second-year visa.

The Senate Education and Employment References Committee inquiry heard about the vulnerabilities and exploitative conditions faced by these types of visa holders. They reported:

We have heard stories from members about contractors saying you have to work for free for X amount of time in order to get a second visa, or you have to provide sexual favours in order to receive a second visa.

One horticulture worker from Taiwan, Sherry Huang, who is now an NUW organiser explained during the Senate inquiry how labour-hire companies target workers. She said:

Typically, the owner of a labour hire company in Australia would set up a labour hire company in Taiwan and then source all the workers from Taiwan. The labour hire agency would charge 417 visa holders a fee of several thousand dollars to arrange flights, accommodation, transport, and a job.

An organiser from the meat industry and the AMIEU, the meat workers union, described one housing situation as follows:

… the showers did not work and there were up to four 417 visa workers in small rooms …They were not allowed to use the heating in winter, the bedding was on the floor, there was no kitchen table, and they had to set up a rice cooker on boxes.

Labour-hire companies who require 417 workers to pay rent on their accommodation stand to make enormous profits. The Fair Work Ombudsman did the sums on one Beresfield property and found:

Based on 20 people paying $100 per week, the potential rental income for the property is over $100,000 per year.

This is simply not good enough. The government should spend more time concentrating on this particular issue than talking to themselves.

The Fair Work Ombudsman's annual report for 2014-15 is particularly important. The Fair Work Ombudsman monitors compliance and investigates acts and practices which are contrary to workplace laws, awards and agreements. The Fair Work Ombudsman's report looked at a number of issues. We saw, for example, across two years that: the issuing of compliance notices increased from 16 to 37; more than 100 extra infringement notices were issued, increasing from 23 to 124; an extra 17 enforceable undertakings were issued; and 21 litigations commenced, up from 12 in the previous year. Tragically, 28 per cent of cases came from my own state of Queensland. In 2014-15, the Fair Work Ombudsman received 930 dispute forms from subclass 417 working holiday visa holders. During this time, a total of $1.6 million was recovered for vulnerable overseas workers. The abuses and exploitations in this industry are outrageous.

Last Friday, the Fair Work Ombudsman released their report inquiring into the wages and conditions of people working under the 417 working holiday visa program, the subject of this cognate debate. The inquiry was established in response to increasing numbers of requests for assistance from temporary visa holders. The inquiry commissioned a survey of 417 visa holders. The report said that over 4,000 people were surveyed. About a quarter of them got the second-year visa. The Fair Work Ombudsman spoke with industry experts, unions and employers.

During the inquiry, information received about the exploitation of 417 visa holders included instances of: underpayment and/or nonpayment of wages; visa holders offering, or being induced to offer, payment to employers and third parties for assistance to gain a second-year work rights visa; an increased dependency on the employer by the visa holder seeking employment during the 88-day specified work requirement of the program in order to secure the second year; sexual harassment and workplace health and safety issues; employers recruiting workers with the offer of unpaid work to meet the second-year visa eligibility requirements; and visa holders working for free in exchange for non-certified accommodation programs. The survey found that 59 percent of the respondents—that is, 2,596 people—stated they were unlikely to complain about their working conditions in case their work was not signed off by their employer. And 66 per cent—that is, 2,904 people—felt employers take advantage of 417 visa holders due to the requirement to undertake regional work.

For the last nearly 18 months, the government has been talking to itself about this issue and been completely missing in action on these egregious examples of exploitation of workers in these areas, particularly in regional areas. The National Party and Liberal Party people sitting in their seats on the other side have done nothing. They have been completely silent about this outrageous expectation in these industries. I represent a regional and rural seat, and I know how important these particular 417, 462 and 457 visas are. But on the exploitation that we have seen in report after report those opposite have been completely silent. They have been talking to themselves. They cannot even work this stuff out themselves. Then they have the gall to ask that we just roll over and let them do this without any proper examination of the legislation and its impact on visas. These people should spend more time protecting workers who are vulnerable.

These industries are important. Agriculture is important. Tourism is important. Horticulture is important. It is important to protect workers in retail and hospitality. But those opposite will not. They will not do anything about it. They just want us to roll over. This is their compromise. I tell you what, you would not want to have the NFF in your corner in a street fight in an alley. You would not want them. They rolled over. Their members must be outraged. They must be outraged at these blokes on the other side and at the leaders of the NFF, because they have rolled over. At the first shot of political warfare, they have rolled over. They have completely rolled over to the government. The NFF had the gall to criticise the Labor Party in relation to this issue, when the NFF had been missing in action.

The mob over there, who sit on the Treasury benches, should do more to protect workers and do less talking about themselves. They should be a bit more malleable and flexible about their views on industrial relations. They should be protecting workers; that is what they should do. They should do more work on 417, 462 and 457 exploitation. That is what they should be doing. (Time expired)

See this speech in context