Garth Hamilton (Groom, Liberal National Party) Share this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker Mitchell, how good it is to be back and seeing your smiling face once again!

I'm going to go off the talking points and deal with my own views on labour hire, which have changed since I first encountered it quite some years ago. I very much welcome an informed debate on labour hire. I entered the workforce as a miner—I was a mining engineer. In 2001 the mining boom was yet to kick off and there was very little opportunity for mining engineers, but there were still good mining jobs out there. So I began work as a contractor, working with a company by the name of PYBAR and Eroc at a mine called Ridgeway. I became very aware very early on of the very different groups around me—the different contractors and the labour hire groups. At that point I very much formed a contractor's first view of the mining industry.

I think there's something which should be part of a debate on labour hire, particularly in mining: it isn't just about pay or conditions but safety must come into it. I will always firmly believe that a contractor led model, even over an owner-operator, is one of the best mechanisms for that. I think the safety stats do stand with that and that's why, when we look across the industry and see somewhere around 1.1 per cent of employees being labour hire, it probably reflects industry's view as well.

There's a further point here about labour hire which is very important. I think the Labor members may pick up that potentially I have some things in common with them—I know I have a lot in common with the member for Hunter when I speak on this. There are some particular aspects of the mining industry that are relevant to this conversation. It's a very small industry at heart. I can travel from mine to mine and find friends who have worked at one place or the other and I can find mining names I know which are three generations deep. The other issue is that it's quite a dangerous industry at points; it has quite dangerous points. I think there's bipartisan support for the mining industry's work in reducing the risk involved and increasing the safety.

The other aspect that I think is relevant is that the mining industry—if not more than others then it's certainly at the forefront of this—experiences boom and bust in a way that can really play havoc with the careers of those in it. I have certainly watched that myself over time and I've experienced it. I have been in the unfortunate situation of having to lay off a large number of people at once, an experience that I don't think anyone ever comes away from without feeling their humanity pinged.

So mining has these unique challenges and, if I go back and think about my time in the industry, labour hire has some deficits with regard to addressing those things. I think that that's an important conversation for us to have. I strongly believe that there's a conversation around the appropriate use of labour hire. This point is where we will diverge. I will always support a contractor or owner-operator model because I think there's great value in maintaining that corporate knowledge and having the fundamental training that goes with it.

Certainly, if I think of my time working with Macmahon, a great mining contractor out of WA, the depth of experience that was on hand for young people entering the industry was so important. We could partner someone up with a thirty-year miner and have them gradually released into the mining environment knowing that they had full awareness of the risks around them. I stand by that. I may be diverting a little from some of my government talking points, but I think this is an important thing for us to say. I'm very proud of how it got here.

I will say this, though, for those opposite: when push came to shove at the Argyle diamond mine, and for us to maintain health and safety standards, the bottom-dollar realities of cost and risk came to bear. We were faced with an option of almost seeing the entire workforce laid off and very much going back to a minimised skeleton shift. At that point labour hire was the appropriate way to keep those people in employment. That's why I believe it's an important part of a fuller conversation, particularly in the mining industry.

See this speech in context