Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Fair Work Amendment (Corrupting Benefits) Bill 2017. We are only four months away from the Liberal-National Party government starting their fifth year of government, and I still find it very difficult to find a government agenda coming out of this parliament, but it is easy to see where the priorities of those opposite are. They are not concerned about fixing the economy; we saw that on Tuesday night with the continuation of debt. They are not concerned about creating jobs; we saw that on Tuesday night. They are going to fall way short of their target, and we are going to have more unemployed, according to their projections. They are not concerned about standing up for the vulnerable or for low-paid workers. Instead, they have turned to them as some form of revenue. No, this government is just interested in obfuscating when it comes to addressing the real issues.

What does this bill before the chamber do? It implements just three of the 79 recommendations of the Heydon royal commission, recommendations made more than 12 months ago. The government has had a year to legislate recommendations from the Heydon royal commission but in that time it has actually done nothing. It was a super-urgent political exercise before the election back in 2015 but since then there has been nothing. Thankfully, at the same time, we have had a response from the Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. Bill Shorten, who brought in a private member's bill to preserve take-home pay and protect penalty rates. Sadly, this legislation before the chamber does nothing in terms of making sure that Australian workplaces are fairer.

What does this bill do? As I am sure anyone would know, the Labor Party abhors corruption in any form. We will not stand for corruption whether it is in unions or any organisation. I find particularly repugnant the idea of low-paid workers' union fees being misused by any union official. Thankfully, they are rare and rogue and punished by the union movement and the criminal law, as they should be. We will support legislation that is properly drafted and applies to companies and registered organisations. But this bill creates new offences for so-called 'corrupting benefits'. The one concern I have about this bill is that there are different tests of intention for making or receiving a bribe, depending on whether you are a union official or an employer. It appears that the legislation would make it easier to prosecute a union official rather than an employer. That does not happen with similar offences in the Commonwealth Criminal Code.

Another concerning aspect is that the bill appears to possibly limit the ability of unions to provide training to employees because that would be seen as a benefit and so be excluded by the legislation. This government does not have too many union members in it. This government fundamentally fails to understand the work of unions and the benefits that all workers reap from unions being allowed to protect workers and make sure their workplaces are safe. It is not just for those who voluntarily give up their wages to be in a union who benefit, but all workers benefit. Unions are responsible for many of the workplace entitlements that we take for granted today. They were responsible for sick leave in the 1920s, annual leave in the 1930s, the eight-hour day in the 1940s, unfair dismissal protection in the 1970s, banning asbestos in the 1980s and domestic violence leave in the noughties. The weekend—the thing that Australians value terribly—is, sadly, currently under threat by the decision to reduce penalty rates, but I will come back to that in a minute. I cannot overstate the importance of having strong unions to protect our Australian workforce; in fact, all Australians benefit.

I want to speak briefly about asbestos on worksites, because there are more than 980,000 construction workers in Australia and some of these workers are being unknowingly exposed to asbestos on their worksites. Seven hundred Australians still die every year from asbestos-related diseases. Asbestos has been banned in Australia since 2003, so no Australian should be exposed to asbestos in any new materials. Sadly, that is not the reality. Building materials containing asbestos are being illegally imported into Australia from other parts of the world where it is not illegal. This poses enormous health risks, not only to workers on new building sites but also to all of us if we later live in or work in buildings that contain this product.

Asbestos is an insidious substance. It is impossible to know that you are being exposed to it until the damage has been done and it is too late. The asbestos fibres are so small that they appear like a pinprick on a magnified follicle of human hair. Exposure to asbestos can cause asbestosis and mesothelioma; both are deadly diseases and there is no cure for either of these diseases. As an example of the value that unions provide to workers and that their training of workers provides benefits, I will share a story told to me by Andrew Ramsay, who was a workplace health and safety coordinator with the CFMEU. Sadly, Andrew is going to retire soon, and I thank him for his incredible service to the CFMEU and to the broader labour movement. Andrew tells me that he was at home one weekend when he received a phone call from a building site in Brisbane that is now the Executive Building in William Street. The person on the other end of the phone said they thought there was asbestos on this building site, a Queensland government project. Andrew was a little disbelieving. Knowing that asbestos was banned in Australia and illegal to import, he could not imagine how asbestos could recently turn up on a building site.

Investigations were made. Sadly, it was confirmed that indeed there was material on the site that contained asbestos. Their particular material contained 60 per cent asbestos. Just to put that in context, the old fibro sheets that some of us might have had in our backyards contained about 10 to 15 per cent asbestos. This material, being used by workers today and trimmed with a power saw because it did not quite fit the specifications, had 60 per cent asbestos. The material had been imported from China and manufactured to the specifications to fit a particular situation, but it did not fit and then the workers took to it with a power saw. What did Andrew do? He immediately shut the site down. Obviously, it is unfortunate. If you know what a construction site involves—the number of people involved and the jobs lined up because of that—then you know to shut it down is a tough thing.

It is unfortunate that this illegal substance somehow made its way past border control and into Australia under the watch of Minister Dutton. Shutting down the building site when asbestos is suspected is necessary to protect the health of all workers. It was the diligence of the union delegate that ensured that the banned substance was not being used in that building site. We are informed that there are 69 job sites across Australia that have had material containing asbestos delivered to them. That is appalling. A few days later, after that discovery, we then had the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection actually blaming the CFMEU for driving developers to use illegal and dangerous products on their building sites. Those were actually the words that came out of Minister Dutton's mouth.

Instead of continuing that obsession with union bashing, Minister Dutton needs to do his job and protect our borders, which seem to be completely porous when it comes to legal and dangerous products. Tightening up our borders would not only ensure that workers are safe from these dangerous products but that ensure our buildings will not be time bombs when they start deteriorating in years to come. We also need to promote safe Australian products that are asbestos free. That then creates local jobs, rather than jobs in other countries.

The Turnbull government has been completely incompetent when it comes to managing these imports. The Turnbull government needs to act now to stop these imports and significantly increase the penalties for those who are guilty of putting Australian lives at risk by importing these deadly products. But I have not heard any words come from those opposite to thank the unions who put in place the training to make sure that the worker was aware enough to say, 'Maybe this is asbestos.' That sort of training—where they are able to recognise something that is very, very dangerous—would be removed by this legislation, despite that training being something that would have actually protected the construction workers and those who will use the building in the future.

I think this government is completely impotent when it comes to protecting workers. They have not stood up for the 7,000 of Australia's lowest paid workers who will face a pay cut of up to $77 a week. We know that these cuts will actually disproportionately hit women. The people in my electorate will have to work longer hours for less pay. We know the Prime Minister could stop these cuts if he wanted to, but sadly too many opposite support these cuts. How can a government that claims to be fair give millionaires a $17,000 tax cut with one hand and then take $77 a week from the lowest paid workers with the other? How could you pretend that was fair? How could the word 'fair' pass your lips if you were doing deeds like that? If you cared, you would do something. Instead, you are wrapping your mouth around words that you are saying but not doing. Only a government completely out of touch could do both of those things. We going to see that occur on 1 July.

Penalty rates are not a luxury; they are a necessary part of the equation when it comes to putting food on the table and paying bills. It is unions who were part of that process that made sure Australian workers could have weekends to spend time with their families. Workers who work weekends should be compensated for not having that time with their families. I know what it is like. I am married to someone who worked every second weekend doing shiftwork, and also I was raised as one of 10 children by a single mum who had to do a lot of shiftwork just to put us through school and feed us.

I also know that young people will be particularly hard hit by these cuts. University students have always relied on weekend work and penalty rates to fund their studies. I was told by Lucas Kennedy, the President of the Student Representative Council at Griffith University—Nathan campus is in Moreton—that cuts to penalty rates will force students to work more hours during the week. This will take them out of classes and study sessions that they should be attending during the week, and this at a time when they have also had an announcement in the budget that they will be paying more HECS fees and paying more HECS fees earlier when they start working, at $42,000.

These cuts to penalty rates will not stop with hospitality workers and retail workers. You know that is the agenda of those opposite. We heard it from nearly 70 or 80 of those opposite before the independent umpire handed down that decision. I think there is a risk to workers in clubs, to hairdressers, to beauticians and to restaurant workers, who will also have their penalty rates cut. That will be another 323,000 workers affected. And it will not be long before the employees in those industries that have nurses, aged-care workers, teachers, community disability workers, cleaners and construction employees are all at risk of having their penalty rates cut.

Labor supports workers being compensated through penalty rates for working on weekends and public holidays. We know that these workers rely on penalty rates for their everyday living expenses. If the Prime Minister cared about protecting workers, he would be supporting Labor's bill to stop these cuts to penalty rates. He would protect the take-home pay of people who rely on penalty rates every week to live. Sadly, the silence coming out of Point Piper is deafening.

The narrow focus of this bill before the chamber is a reflection of the Turnbull government's ideological drive. It will not do anything to stamp out corrupt payments between companies. The Turnbull government needs to listen to all Australians who are concerned about their jobs rather than just having a Prime Minister worried about his own job.

See this speech in context