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

I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Working Holiday Maker Employer Register) Bill 2017. For the edification of the House and also those who may be listening, a working holiday-maker is an individual holding a subclass 417 working holiday visa or a subclass 462 work and holiday visa. To be eligible for these visa subclasses, applicants must be between 18 and 30 years of age and be from eligible partner countries. These visas allow holders to work in Australia while having an extended holiday for up to 12 months. It's really a cultural exchange and it's done for the purpose of amity between countries and to have people from overseas get to know the values and virtues of Australia.

The Treasury Laws Amendment (Working Holiday Maker Reform) Bill 2016 passed parliament in late 2016 as part of a raft of bills better known as the backpacker tax package—and who could ever forget it? As part of the package, there was a requirement that set up a legislative framework allowing the taxation commissioner to establish a mandatory registration process for employers of working holiday-makers. Through this registration, businesses would be listed on the Australian Business Register as an employer of working holiday-makers and withhold tax from those employees at the correct rate of taxation. This meant there would be greater protections for working holiday-makers from exploitation at the hands of unscrupulous employers. However, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Working Holiday Maker Employer Register) Bill 2017 seeks to water down and strip away the provisions to protect working holiday-makers in Australia that passed parliament only at the end of 2016. In an attempt to quietly make good on a backroom deal that the government made with an Independent senator to pass the original legislation, the Turnbull government are with this piece of legislation throwing out everything they once stood for.

This comes at a time when there are significant, recurrent and highly publicised stories of working holiday-makers being exploited in regards to their wages, conditions, safety and entitlements. Regrettably, there have even been stories of vulnerable workers being exploited that have not been published or publicised. I've met with workers across the country in my role as the shadow minister for immigration and border protection, including in my home state of Queensland as well as in Bendigo, the Blue Mountains, Perth and elsewhere. What I've repeatedly heard in these meetings is that the current conservative government, the Turnbull government, isn't doing enough to protect vulnerable and migrant workers. Now, out of desperation to do a deal, this out-of-touch government will water down one of the very few protections backpackers have when it comes to their pay. Once again, only Labor will stand up to protect workers from exploitation, including Australian workers, working holiday-makers and any other overseas workers.

Labor will oppose this bill. This legislation is yet another example of the Turnbull government's back-pedalling. I'm sure everyone in this place and the other place can remember the painstaking back-and-forth negotiations about the backpacker tax at the end of 2016. We were forced to endure this because of the inability of the Turnbull government to govern and govern effectively. The prolonged process created uncertainty for farms across the country as well as potential working holiday-makers. The Prime Minister and the former Deputy Prime Minister, the member for New England, did everything they could to try and collapse over the finish line at the end of the 2016 parliamentary year.

With an odd sense of sense of deja vu or like a bad episode of The Twilight Zone, we're back again debating issues surrounding the backpacker tax. The reason we're here is that the government cut a deal with an Independent senator, a crossbencher. We know that, in exchange for the Independent senator's support of their preferred tax rate at the end of 2016, the Turnbull government agreed to weaken the original legislation before it had passed in the first place. In TheSydney Morning Herald on 13 December 2017, a spokesperson for the Treasurer said in relation to this bill:

The government agreed to introduce the amendment after reaching an agreement with the senator to pass the original WYHM—

working holiday-maker—

legislation.

This commitment did not extend to the successful passage of the amendment.

In other words, through the agreement, they agreed to introduce the amendment but they didn't make a commitment to actually see the successful passage of the amendment. You wonder what deal they really did make and how the crossbencher feels about it now.

It's been so long since the bill was first introduced on 16 February 2017 that it leaves me wondering why this legislation has been resurrected and why it's now before the House today. Could it be that the Independent senator is worried? Could it be that the government cut the deal in late 2016 and that particular Independent senator has now realised that the government failed to keep their end of the bargain? I really wonder. It is curious timing that this bill comes before the House at the same time as the government needs the support of the same Independent senator to get its $80 billion handout to the top end of town across the line. It is clear that cutting deals and selling out workers is the norm for the Turnbull government. It is very important to be sceptical of the government's motives in relation to this matter—and who knows?

The amendments before the House today will remove an avenue of protection for vulnerable workers and a method of ensuring greater transparency. It removes the requirement for the public listing of employers registered to employ working holiday-makers, which affects a backpacker's ability to log in online and choose an employer who will charge the correct level of tax each week. Without the ability to check this, backpackers could be out of pocket each week and have to wait until tax time to get their money back.

In an ironic twist, this legislation comes less than two months after the government's Migration and Other Legislation Amendment (Enhanced Integrity) Bill 2017 passed the House. It was a piece of legislation that Labor supported, because it went some way to protect vulnerable workers. They were good measures, but, by comparison, this bill is not a good measure. It sells out workers, it sells out backpackers and it diminishes their rights. Labor will oppose this callous undermining of migrant and backpacker workers—some of the most vulnerable and exploited workers in the country.

Let's look at the precise provisions of the bill. The Treasury Laws Amendment (Working Holiday Maker Employer Register) Bill 2017 amends the bill and A New Tax System (Australian Business Number) Act 1999. There are also subsequent amendments to the Taxation Administration Act 1953. The amendments to A New Tax System (Australian Business Number) Act 1999 repeal a certain provision. That provision, which is called paragraph 26(3)(jc), details whether or not an entity such as a business is registered under section 16-147 in schedule 1 to the Taxation Administration Act 1953 and the date of the said registration. The paragraph will be amended:

… to ensure that the Registrar of the Australian Business Register is not able to release publicly or otherwise provide working holiday maker employer information to a person who applies to have the entry in the Australian Business Register about an entity released to them.

In other words, it's about not releasing the information so that the working holiday-maker can't get that information about the entity which is registered in the Australian Business Register. It means that if someone specifically wants to make an inquiry about a potential employer, to see whether they are registered, the bill prohibits that information being released. The explanatory memorandum itself rails against transparency by explaining that, even when the information about the register is tabled in parliament, this reporting process will not identify any working holiday-maker employers.

The bill specifically goes out of its way to ensure that businesses and individuals who employ backpackers will never publicly be identified. If these businesses and employers are doing the right thing, what do they have to hide? Paragraph 26(3)(jd) details that, if an entity's registration to employ working holiday-makers has been cancelled, this paragraph will be repealed. What this means is that working holiday-makers in Australia will no longer be able to look up whether or not the business employing them is even registered to do so, heightening the risk of exploitation of backpackers. Even if a business has had its registration to employ working holiday-makers cancelled, working holiday-makers will not be able to access this information. The bill strips out vital protections for inherently vulnerable workers.

You only have to look at the explanatory memorandum for this piece of legislation to find out the Turnbull government's only plan to address possible exploitation of workers: expectation. The explanatory memorandum reads:

It would be expected—

expected!—

that … employers of working holiday makers would advise individual employees who are working holiday makers of their status as a registered working holiday maker employer.

It's expected that the employer will do the right thing. It simply beggars belief that the Turnbull government is denying working holiday-makers something it had previously promised to them, a public register that allows for visa holders to review who is registered for working holiday-maker programs, but is then expecting—expecting!—the business to do the right thing: to disclose their registration.

This register would have ensured that about 200,000 prospective working holiday-makers in Australia would be able to be paid appropriately before they even apply for work and have greater protections given the cases and instances of abuse and exploitation we have seen in public. Instead, the Turnbull government have sold out these workers and their protections, as they've done on so many occasions, such as when they failed to do anything about the cut to the penalty rates to some of Australia's lowest paid workers.

Working holiday-makers are vital to Australia's farmers and producers, our regional towns and our Australian economy. Throughout my electorate in the Somerset region and rural Ipswich, and indeed Ipswich central, tourism is a significant employer of local people, and working holiday-makers help keep local cafes, hotels and tourism operators in business. In the first year of their trip, those on a working holiday visa, subclass 417, can choose to do 88 days of specific work in regional Australia, which is more often than not doing seasonal agricultural work such as fruit picking or working in pubs or hostels, often in regional and remote locations. Fulfilling this 88-day requirement is one of the criteria to be eligible to stay for a visa for a second year. The main purpose of these visas, as I've said earlier in the speech, is a cultural exchange opportunity for young travellers who could work to pay their way throughout Australia.

The Turnbull government needs to be doing more to protect workers, especially vulnerable migrant workers and backpackers in regional areas specifically. I recently heard reports in Rockhampton, Gladstone and Cairns, where I was. These workers expressed to me their concerns about the lack of protection for working holiday-makers. There is the desire of locals for local workers to get the first shot at jobs, but locals in these regional areas are concerned as well about the exploitation they've either witnessed or heard about. Our temporary work visa program must not be used as a backdoor way to source cheap labour. It's essential that the government undertake strict labour market testing and temporary skilled workforce arrangements to ensure employers aren't favouring overseas workers over local Australian workers by undercutting wages.

It's important to note today that we had to drag the government kicking and screaming on labour market testing. In my time in this place, the coalition partners have never supported labour market testing. We fought them across two days in this chamber on labour market testing, and we had to defeat them in the Senate. Fortunately, the government has accepted reality and this morning accepted Labor's amendments. We welcome it. It's probably the first time in the 10 or 11 years I've been in this place that the Liberal and National parties have ever accepted labour market testing. Why? Because the budget requirement meant that they had to get their Skilling Australia Fund through. But we welcome their about-face. We also would welcome it, by the way, if they agreed to our 2016 plan for a fairer temporary work visa system, which we took to the last federal election. That's a measure to ensure that, no matter how a person is employed or which skilled visa a person works under, all workers are treated with fairness, respect and dignity.

Our commitment to the integrity of the skilled migration program was further strengthened when we announced in May 2017 that in government we would establish an Australian skills authority. That Australian skills authority would be an independent labour-market testing body that would ensure temporary work visas are only available when there's a genuine skills gap and no local workers can do the job. This ensures local workers get the first shot at a local job while ensuring that the temporary skilled migration program doesn't exploit vulnerable workers.

We implore the government not to weaken the legislation before the chamber today. We are very concerned on this side of the chamber of the potential exploitation or abuse of workers by the passage of this bill. We hear stories about these abuses reported in the media, by unions, by the Fair Work Ombudsman and by concerned industry bodies. The March 2016 report A national disgrace: the exploitation of temporary work visa holders details these abuses in length. The exploitation of these vulnerable workers shows that changes to the working holiday visa programs must offer better protection against unscrupulous employers seeking to take advantage of cheap and vulnerable labour. These are the people who visit Australia, travel around our country, see our stunning landscapes and experience our culture while working their way around the place. They can enter a small rural town, pick fruit and make some money. But, regrettably, they can fall into the most abhorrent exploitation by unscrupulous individuals and employers.

Some migrant workers have detailed their working conditions as slave labour, according to The Guardian. The report Wage theft in Australia found nearly 30 per cent of migrant workers surveyed as part of the National Temporary Migrant Work Survey were paid $12 an hour or less, well below the minimum wage. And news.com.au reported in May 2007 about Matt Workman, a chemist from the UK travelling in Australia with his girlfriend, who was verbally and physically abused by his supervisor. Mr Workman said:

Within our first two weeks at the farm, the supervisor has hit me on the arm and threatened to break my arms.

His negative experiences weren't limited to his time on the farm. The hostel he and his girlfriend stayed at was a place of anguish for fellow working holiday-makers. He told news.com.au:

I have seen people crying, people fear being sacked and kicked out of the hostel with nowhere to go in the middle of nowhere … It is impossible to make a complaint without risking being evicted without notice.

The UK government's Foreign and Commonwealth Office has provided advice online warning tourists heading to Australia on working-holiday visas that occasionally issues can arise. Well, it's far more than occasionally. It's simply not good enough, what the government has done in this space.

Any amendments to legislation that undermine Australia's work-holiday visa arrangements aren't amendments that should be considered in this place, and they shouldn't be supported. There have been claims of psychological and sexual exploitation. There wouldn't be a member in this place who hasn't had people come up to them and tell them about egregious exploitation. I know I have as a local federal member. Some of the most terrible exploitation I've heard in country towns, when I've been doing mobile offices. Even in Ipswich I've heard shocking examples of sexual exploitation and intimidation. In July 2017, the ABC's Australian Story shared the story of backpackers who'd been exploited working on Australian farms. A Canadian backpacker, Chelsey, was offered a job on a grape farm in Mildura. She had to fight off a farmer—her employer—as he attempted to sexually assault her. Marcel, a German backpacker who arrived in Australia in late 2006, lost his left thumb in an accident on his first day on the job in a sweet potato farm in Bundaberg. He said:

The machine had been switched off but was switched on again very quickly and my hand was trapped. When I pulled out my hand my left thumb was missing … I had never done this sort of work before and we were given no more than a 15 or 30 second safety induction.

A 15- or 30-second safety induction is outrageous. Your heart goes out to these people. Recently I met with the members of the National Union of Workers in Melbourne and Bendigo, hearing their personal stories of exploitation. They had faced shocking exploitation at the hands of unscrupulous employers.

While these stories definitely do not occur on every farm across Australia—and there are good employers; we know that—we should do everything in our power, in this place, to ensure that unscrupulous employers aren't able to taint the entirety of the agricultural sector. One way we can do this is by making sure these workers know about things. Knowledge is important. Knowledge is powerful. Knowledge is an anti-exploitation measure. This bill removes that knowledge.

The amendment bill before the House is proof that the Turnbull government can't be trusted on protecting workers, especially working holiday-makers. We believe in a fair day's work. We believe it deserves a fair day's pay with proper conditions to match enjoyed by everyone who works in this country. Labor's plan for a fairer temporary work visa system, which we took to the last election, included measures I urged the government to adopt. We need to ensure that the Working Holiday Maker Program is appropriately regulated and that allegations and instances of abuse and exploitation are properly investigated. We need to properly resource the Fair Work Ombudsman and we need the political will to clamp down on exploitation. The Turnbull government needs to take the abuse of working holiday-makers more seriously and ensure that visa holders aren't having their wages, their workplace safety and conditions or their entitlements exploited.

Having a register of employers registered for employing working holiday-makers is a step in the right direction in cracking down on the exploitation of workers at the hands of employers who are not doing the right thing. It gives migrant workers the chance to make an informed choice, with knowledge about who they should work for and how their weekly take-home pay will be affected by that choice. Instead, this government has opted to go down the path of cheap political trade-offs and pointscoring. It's a government that's prepared to cut a backroom deal on an $80 billion handout to millionaires, to multinationals. The government did a deal with an Independent senator at the end of 2016, and today we're debating the outcome of that deal. It's a play from the playbook of the Liberal and National Parties, which Labor will always stand up against. Only Labor will stand up against the exploitation of workers, including migrant workers, working holiday-makers or other people who come to this country. We will not support this bill. Knowledge is power.

See this speech in context