Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Border Protection) Share this | Hansard source

Labor will support these amendments. This is just fixing up sloppy drafting, and we are happy to assist the government in whatever way we can in a bipartisan way. We support the amendments.

Question agreed to.

by leave—I move opposition amendments (1) and (2) together:

(1) Schedule 1, page 8 (after line 10), after item 14, insert:

14A At the end of subsection 140GBA(4)

  Add "The period must not start earlier than 4 months before the nomination is received by the Minister.".

(2) Schedule 1, item 15, page 8 (after line 24), after subsection 140GBA(6), insert:

  (6AA) The Minister must not make a determination under subsection (5) unless the Minister is reasonably satisfied that any advertising of the position undertaken in the determined manner:

  (a) will be targeted in such a way that a significant proportion of suitably qualified and experienced Australian citizens or Australian permanent residents would be likely to be informed about the position; and

  (b) will set out any skills or experience requirements that are appropriate to the position.

  (6AB) A duration determined for the purposes of paragraph (6)(d) must be at least 4 weeks.

As I highlighted in my speech in the second reading debate, these amendments are to ensure proper labour market testing is in place. There needs to be real, genuine and strict labour market testing. Labour market testing requires that employers who want to bring in overseas workers test the local labour market first, to give Australians and permanent residents the first chance at local jobs. This is to make sure that, if no suitably and qualified local workers are readily available, we can bring people from overseas with the skill, talent and ability to contribute to our economy. These amendments are all about putting local workers first.

Although the legislation allows the immigration minister to determine by legislative instrument the manner of labour market testing, it doesn't provide that he can follow through on it. The minister may only include the following in the legislative instrument: the language to be used in advertising, the advertising method, the period during or prior to nomination in which the advertisement must occur, and the duration of the advertising. The government's bill asks Australians to trust the immigration minister to do the right thing in this legislative instrument, which is non-disallowable. Many on the opposite benches, including the Prime Minister and the Treasurer, when he was the shadow minister for immigration, have voted again and again in this place against labour market testing. They can't be trusted to do the right and proper thing to protect Australian jobs.

I remember in the last days of the Rudd government, back in 2013, when those opposite, then in opposition, including the now Treasurer, went on the rampage against us when the member for Gorton tried to bring in proper labour market testing. We had to go to the crossbench, and didn't get the strictness we wanted, because the then opposition, now government, opposed us. They have voted in this place again and again against labour market testing. What have we seen since they announced their clampdown on 457s? Have we seen any details of the legislative instrument? Have we seen media reports, pronouncements or major speeches by the immigration minister, anything that would give us any confidence whatsoever that they will do the right thing? We have not.

I have been in this place for 10 years, and I know the Liberal and National parties haven't been committed to this. They haven't been champions of proper labour market testing. At the public hearing of the Senate inquiry the ACTU, the organisation that represents workers, testified:

Labour market testing is critical to this whole debate. The fact of the matter is the government opposed labour market testing up hill and down dale until April 2017, when they suddenly were converted to the idea of labour market testing.

It's probably the greatest conversion since Saint Paul on the road to Damascus—and we believe they're going to carry through and not backslide? I think they're going to commit apostasy. They don't have any religious fervour in this area. They have no commitment whatsoever to labour market testing. I'll talk about what those opposite will do in due course during this consideration in detail. The ACTU, a great organisation whose unions represent workers in the workplace, said:

… quite frankly, given the government's history on labour market testing, why would you trust this government to implement a serious regime of labour market testing? We just don't.

And neither do we on this side of the chamber. We know that the Turnbull government has failed to protect penalty rates for 700,000 Australian workers. Now this out-of-touch government wants us and the Australian public to believe that it'll do the right thing with this legislation, yet for month after month it has done absolutely nothing, made no announcements of details, and put in place these very narrow guidelines for a legislative instrument.

These amendments, which were circulated in my name, reflect the provisions of the opposition leader's private member's bill: the Migration Amendment (Putting Local Workers First) Bill 2016. Amendment (1) circulated in my name ensures that labour market testing must not start earlier than four months prior to the nomination. We've got details about what the minister must be reasonably satisfied about, and we've also put in a provision that the advertising must be real and the duration must be at least four weeks. There is more I'll say in the course of this debate, but I urge my colleagues to also say more words about it.

See this speech in context