Madeleine King (Brand, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the Coastal Trading (Revitalising Australian Shipping) Amendment Bill 2017, this government's second attempt to wind back Labor's 2012 coastal trading reforms. I support the amendments moved by the member for Grayndler and what the member for Whitlam has just said in suggesting that the government withdraws this legislation. It is a good idea, a fine idea, and I hope they take it up.

Briefly, on indulgence, if I may, Deputy Speaker, I want to take this opportunity—my first opportunity at the despatch box as a new shadow minister in the Labor opposition, having joined the shadow ministry at the end of June—to thank my Labor colleagues in this place and in the other place for their tremendous support before and since that time. It is an honour to serve my electorate of Brand and to work alongside such dedicated people who are committed to the Labor cause and to their local communities, their states and territories and to the nation as a whole. I would also like to thank those on the other side of the chamber who offered me their best wishes. I would like to thank my husband, Jamie King, for his unwavering support, and I would especially like to thank my electorate office staff—Kate, Amy, Ryan, Georgia, John and Jenny—for their commitment to the people of Rockingham and Kwinana, their hardworking efforts in supporting my role, and their patience and understanding as together we take on the responsibilities of a shadow ministerial office. You are great people doing great work and I thank you all immensely.

Returning to the coastal shipping legislation, it is, as I said, this government's second attempt to wind back Labor's 2012 coastal trading reforms. Like everyone on this side of the House, like everyone on the side of Australian flagged and crewed vessels, I do not support this bill and its damaging intent. Labor will always support Australian shipping, while this government will seek only to destroy it. It is a rehash, a second run, after the coalition's failure to pass the Shipping Legislation Amendment Bill back in November 2015. It is a bill that continues to push this government's ideological agenda to deregulate Australia's shipping industry at all costs, and the costs will be great if this government gets its way.

If we look back at its first failed attempt at repealing Labor's legislation of 2012, and related bills, we can see that Australian jobs and Australian wage standards are just collateral damage for this Liberal government. The means by which wage-earning Australians can earn a decent living is just collateral damage to this government as it puts its ideology of 'profits at all costs' first. We see this in its enduring support for the cutting of penalty rates, cuts that are hurting some of the lowest-paid workers in this country, and we see it in its $85 billion tax break for big business.

Labor puts people first. Our reforms sought to revitalise the Australian shipping industry, which fell into decline under the Howard government. But let's be straight about this: the Howard government set out to fundamentally dismantle the shipping industry in Australia. During the Howard government's time, the number of Australian flagged vessels fell from 55 in 1996 to only 21 in 2007.

And let's remember—as if we could forget—in 1998, Australia witnessed the most despicable act of a democratically elected government against a free citizen workforce. Aided enthusiastically by the Howard government, Patrick Stevedores sacked its entire workforce in the middle of the night and replaced it; brought out the security guards and attack dogs; dropped in, by dinghy and minibus, a mostly ex-military workforce, trained in Dubai—that in itself an exercise enabled by the Howard government. The Howard government, Minister Reith and Patrick together colluded to exclude workers from their workplace, to replace the workforce with another one trained overseas, to bring attack dogs onto our wharves and to intimidate and harm legitimate workers who were merely seeking to do their job.

What transpired was the lowest point in Australian industrial relations history. It was brutal and it was barbaric. It was shameful and disgraceful conduct by the Liberal government then, 20 years ago, and no-one has forgotten what they did. How can anyone forget those scenes they created of balaclavaed men on the wharves, with their security guards and their dogs on patrol? It seems more like a war zone than the working port of Fremantle, and I know my friend and colleague the member for Fremantle will remember those scenes, as we all do. We were younger at that time—much younger—but we cannot forget. This brutal behaviour by a government inspired hundreds of thousands of workers around the country to support their unions, to join with the MUA, which were at the front of this battle. Many of my generation caught the spark of this action, describing it as the seminal moment of their career. Indeed, Sally McManus, President of the ACTU, stated as much, describing the Patrick dispute as a flashpoint in her fight for workers' rights and conditions. The Australian Labor Party and its members stood side by side with the wharfies and the Maritime Union of Australia to fight against this awful and immoral attack by a government and its cronies on the workers of this country.

Earlier this year, I was really pleased to join Christy Cain, the Secretary of the WA MUA, and Paddy Crumlin, the national secretary, and other leaders and members of the trade union and labour movement to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the waterfront dispute. You couldn't say it was a happy occasion. We were just remembering—they in particular were remembering; they were the people that fought the fight—really dark times in this nation's history. We understood the significance of the time then and we still do today. It's something that Labor could never do. That's because Labor is the only party that truly understands that, to build national wealth and business confidence, you must have support from the ground up. You must reach an accord or a consensus, otherwise what's the point? Labor knows in our bones that without consensus lasting reform is unlikely. And I don't mean the pseudo consensus that the Liberal Party manufactures in the other place as they buy off and make dodgy deals with the disgraceful Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party of two; I mean the consensus across the community and the workforce and industry that can only be built with commitment to genuine consultation and engagement. This is the consensus that the Labor Party builds with the best interests of all at heart.

When we returned to government in 2008, we knew we needed to look to the long-term growth of the Australian shipping industry by encouraging investment and promoting international competitiveness, and our reforms did this. Our reforms also encouraged the employment of Australian seafarers. But this government's anti-Australian seafarer agenda takes another approach altogether. According to the official modelling for its failed 2015 legislation, which the legislation before us is trying to re-enact, it was forecast that 93 per cent of seafarer jobs on Australian vessels would be lost and that Australian wage standards would be replaced with Third World standards. That is the outcome of this legislation. This is the Liberal Party vision and the Turnbull government's vision for Australian shipping: 93 per cent of seafarers' jobs cut on Australian vessels. Well, what a disgrace, what a legacy—cutting 93 per cent of a workforce. But they have done worse. After all, they cut 100 per cent with Patrick late last century. Even though that legislation failed, following its defeat this government has continued to foster uncertainty in our once great shipping industry.

With this new bill, the government continues to work at eliminating Australian jobs and the entire Australian domestic shipping industry. And to what end? It's not sound for economic or national security measures. If the government had bothered to adequately consult with the industry and stakeholders, it would find this out. It has not adequately consulted with those who will be impacted by this bill.

One face-to-face meeting with each of the maritime unions on the importance of a skilled maritime workforce and two meetings with stakeholders does not seem like even remotely enough consultation for these important matters, especially when the major peak body that represents Australian based shipping operators was not invited to either of those meetings.

The government chose to ignore the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development's recommendation that a draft of the bill be circulated for feedback prior to being tabled in parliament. That's a top idea—ignore the experts! Ignore your own departments! And, despite acknowledging a need for bipartisanship in the area of coastal shipping reform, at no stage before or after the release by the minister of the Coastal Shipping Reforms Discussion Paper was Labor consulted about the merits or otherwise of possible amendments to the existing legislation, nor were we given a briefing on the final version of the bill before it was tabled in parliament. The Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development did not build bipartisan support for these changes, and, if he thinks he did, he failed utterly.

On the other hand, Labor's shipping reforms were the result of a four-year process which involved a parliamentary inquiry and a consultation with industry, unions and key stakeholders. Our legislation was also subjected to two rounds of exposure drafts. The goal behind our reforms was to rebuild Australia's shipping industry with a lasting consensus. Following years of neglect, Labor determined to have more Australians crewing more Australian flagged vessels, carrying more Australian goods around Australia's magnificent coastline. We worked with industry to put in place reforms that were designed to reduce the costs faced by Australians so they could be competitive with their international rivals.

They were pretty comprehensive reforms, as a matter of fact, with a package for our shipping companies that included a zero tax rate, more generous accelerated-depreciation arrangements, rollover relief for selected capital assets, new tax incentives to employ Australian seafarers, and an exemption from the royalty-withholding tax for bareboat-leased vessels. We also worked to strengthen the local industry by creating an international shipping register. This register allowed operators of Australian flagged vessels to have a mix of both Australian and foreign crews employed on internationally agreed rates and conditions. I would like to note that Labor's changes did not preclude the use of foreign vessels. They required firms needing to move freight between Australian ports to, in the first instance—and quite rightly so—get an Australian operator to do the work. If no Australian operator was available, then foreign vessels could be used, as long as they paid Australian-level wages on domestic sectors. And that's fair. We also made sure that oil companies had to pay for all damage caused by their ships, as we developed our country's first National Ports Strategy. We replaced a multitude of conflicting and confusing state and territory laws and regulations with one national regulator, administering one set of modern laws.

The cost of the government not committing to building consensus and not helping to revitalise our coastal shipping industry will lead to the destruction of an industry that is of vital national importance and of strategic importance. Defence experts have long recognised the importance of maintaining a domestic maritime workforce. It ensures that Australia has a pool of highly skilled labour that can be quickly mobilised during times of national emergency. Our naval and merchant fleets come together in such times. But all that would change if the government got its way and passed this legislation. And, obviously, there are national security concerns when we outsource our shipping industry. Australian seafarers undergo stringent background checks to ensure that they do not pose security threats. We have no oversight on overseas seafarers; we do not know their backgrounds, and we do not know what, if any, scrutiny they undergo. Why would you want to do away with a highly skilled workforce in any event? What about the national interest, and what about Australian jobs?

What these changes would do is eliminate Australian jobs, decimate an entire industry and, potentially, put the national interest at risk. And this evidence all comes from the regulation impact statement that accompanied the Liberal's 2015 legislation which the current legislation is trying to mimic. In that statement, we were told that most of the savings expected to be produced by that legislation—88 per cent of the savings, in fact—were to come from Australian crews being replaced with cheaper, foreign crews. This government was seeking for vessel operators to sack Australians from their jobs and give those jobs to less-well-paid overseas crews to make savings. Thankfully, the Senate at that time acted in the national interest and quite rightly rejected the coalition's legislation.

As an island continent, we are reliant on our maritime industry. Nearly all of our imports and exports are transported by ship. In fact, the Department of Infrastructure, Regional Development and Cities advises that 99 per cent of our exports rely on sea transport—an industry also heavily relied on for our foreign domestic freight. One-tenth of global sea trade flows through our ports. Given this, why would we work in this place against positive reform of this very important industry? We are here today again seeing the government at it, just doing exactly that. Less than two years after the Senate rejected its flawed agenda, this government is having another crack. And it is not only the maritime industry that is worried about what the government is trying to do; other transport modes are concerned, too. They are concerned that this bill will advantage foreign operators and put them at a competitive disadvantage. The Freight on Rail Group made a submission in response to the discussion paper. They were concerned about what it would mean to them. They submitted that the proposed amendments have the potential to introduce an unreasonable competitive advantage to foreign ships that may choose to compete in the domestic freight market. How on earth is that fair?

To conclude, let me say that we on this side do not support this legislation. I agree with what the member for Whitlam suggested: it should be withdrawn entirely. If it is not, I will support the amendments suggested by the member for Grayndler. But, best of all, I think those opposite should withdraw it. We do not support the legislation. It is an attack on the Australian shipping industry, Australian seafarers and our national interest. There is a very real difference between Labor and those opposite in relation to the shipping industry. We will not agree to the destruction of the shipping industry in this country. We simply will not. Let me point out that during this government's time in office we have seen 12 vessels reflagged to foreign states, and, with each vessel being reflagged, we have seen the Australian flag replaced and Australian workers replaced. It is not good enough. (Time expired)

See this speech in context