Julian Leeser (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this motion as the chair of the Joint Committee on Migration, and I have to say that I was a bit annoyed when I saw the text of this motion, because this motion, this represents the work that the Joint Committee on Migration is doing. The Joint Committee on Migration is not enquiring into worker exploitation; it is enquiring into the working holiday-maker visa.

The economic growth as a result of that visa from the tourism side alone is worth $3.1 billion to the national economy. Sixty per cent of all farms in Australia are dependent on working holiday-maker visas to do some of the agricultural work. The benefit to the agricultural, hospitality and tourism sectors is massive, not to mention the very important benefit that we have in terms of soft power diplomacy by people having a cultural experience in Australia, including a great on-farm experience.

We have delivered an interim report, not a final report. In the interim report we had one paragraph on the issue of worker exploitation—and, for the record, let me read that to you. It said:

The Committee is in the process of hearing evidence about allegations of exploitation of WHMs. Over the last few years this has been a serious issue and has been the subject of investigations by the Fair Work Ombudsman and a Migrant Worker Taskforce chaired by Professor Alan Fels AO. The Committee is considering those reports and their implementation, and will have more to say in the final report.

Let me be clear: if you are on a working holiday-maker visa, the same industrial laws that apply to you are the same industrial laws that apply to an Australian and the same industrial laws that apply to somebody working in the cities and that apply to every member of this parliament. If there is a boss that has done the wrong thing, we should throw the book at them. There is no excuse for this. But I think what has gone on here in some sections of the labour movement that do not like the working holiday-maker visa—that wants to abolish the working holiday-maker visa—is that they have overplayed their hand on quite legitimate concerns about worker exploitation in order to add to the case to remove this visa.

I want to give him some perspective on the level of work exportation that came from the evidence that we received at the committee from the Fair Work Ombudsman. The Fair Work Ombudsman said, in response to questions on notice, that six per cent of all formal disputes during the year 2019-20 involved allegations in relation to working holiday-makers—six per cent of all their cases, and yet it is the major issue that we hear about from people in the labour movement about working holiday-makers.

We also hear it's a very big issue in agriculture. But the facts don't bear that out as well. In 2019-20 the top five industries for completed FWO formal disputes involving working holiday-makers were: accommodation and food services, 29 per cent; administrative and support services, 14 per cent; construction, 12 per cent; agriculture, 12 per cent; and retail trade, eight per cent. So while it is an issue—and I don't wish to downplay the issue; as I say, we should throw the book at anybody who breaks the law—I support the working holiday-maker visa. It is absolutely vital to the future of our country. It's absolutely vital to the agricultural and tourism sectors.

I acknowledge my friend the member for Bennelong, who's been an active member of that committee. We made a series of recommendations to restart the agricultural industries that are affected by the shortage of working holiday-makers, including extending the visas of working holiday-makers who are presently here and allowing other people on temporary visas to have extensions or changes made to their visa arrangements if they go out and work in the agricultural sector in hard-to-staff areas. We also encouraged the very innovative Have a Gap Year at Home campaign, to encourage young Australians to go out and see our country, pick some fruit and do something to help our country at a time when one of the absolutely iconic industries of our country—agriculture and horticulture—desperately needs the help of our young people. All of these recommendations have been responded to and the government has supported all of these recommendations, which is a terrific thing.

None of these recommendations in total will solve the agricultural labour shortage that we have on our farms. That's why we want to see the Working Holiday Maker program restart. That's why announcements that the government has made about the Pacific Labour Scheme and the Seasonal Worker Program have been so important. While not downplaying the issue of the importance of worker exploitation, it's disappointing to get this particular motion distorting what the work of the committee is all about. It is about the working holiday-maker visa. It is about getting the fruit off the trees. It is about something which is good for Australia's relationships with 40-odd other countries and is also good for very important sectors in our economy like agriculture and tourism.

See this speech in context