Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the following from occurring in relation to proceedings on the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022:

(1) on Tuesday, 8 November when the bill is called on, the Leader of the Opposition, or a Member representing, speaking for no longer than 30 minutes;

(2) the time limit for other Members speaking on the second reading debate being 10 minutes;

(3) on Wednesday, 9 November, the second reading debate continuing when the bill is called on;

(4) notwithstanding standing order 31, at 8 pm on Wednesday, 9 November, the bill being called on for further consideration;

(5) the second reading debate continuing until either:

(a) no further Members rise to speak; or

(b) a Minister requires that the debate be adjourned at no earlier than 10 pm, at which point, debate being adjourned and the House immediately adjourning until Thursday, 10 November at 9 am;

(6) from 9 pm on Wednesday, 9 November, the time limit for Members speaking on the second reading debate being 5 minutes;

(7) from 7.30 pm on Wednesday, 9 November until the adjournment of the House:

(a) any division called for being deferred until the first opportunity on Thursday, 10 November; and

(b) if any Member draws the attention of the Speaker to the state of the House, the Speaker announcing that he will count the House at the first opportunity on Thursday, 10 November, if the Member then so desires;

(8) on Thursday, 10 November when the bill is called on, questions being immediately put on any amendments moved to the motion for the second reading and on the second reading of the bill;

(9) if required, a consideration in detail stage of the bill, with all government amendments to be moved together, all opposition amendments to be moved together, and any crossbench Members' amendments to be moved as one set per Member, with:

(a) one question to be put on all government amendments;

(b) one question to be put on all opposition amendments;

(c) separate questions to be put on any sets of amendments moved by crossbench Members; and

(d) one question to be put that the bill [as amended] be agreed to.

(10) should a Minister require, any question provided for under paragraph (9) being put after no less than 10 minutes of debate on each set of amendments;

(11) when the bill has been agreed to, the question being put immediately on the third reading of the bill; and

(12) any variation to this arrangement being made only on a motion moved by a Minister.

I won't use all the time because, obviously, whatever time is not used on this has a chance of being used on the bill itself, although I suspect that, after I finish, some of the time will be used by others which also could have been used to speak on the bill itself. For the information of members, I'll just explain the process that's involved in the motion. I'll say a few things quickly as to why, and then let the House get on with the debate.

The motion that is now before the House has the following impacts. First of all, speaking times go immediately from 15 minutes down to 10, with the exception of the first speech given either by the Leader of the Opposition or on behalf of the Leader of the Opposition. That's a half-hour speech. I think it's inappropriate for that to be given anywhere but in the House, and I also think it should always be for the full time, so that's been left as it is. For everyone else, it goes from 15 minutes to 10 minutes. Once the bill is brought on, we'll continue debating it in that way today. Once it's brought on tomorrow, the debating will continue with 10-minute speeches. When we get to 7.30—and we've tried this once, and it seemed to work. When people have prepared speeches for the adjournment, and they're often important—people have diarised them; sometimes people have even brought people down for them—I'm reluctant to stop those speeches from taking place. So what the resolution would do is that between 7.30 and 8 pm we would have the adjournment debate. At the conclusion of having the adjournment debate we would not adjourn and we would go back to debating the bill between 8 pm and 9 pm. That would happen with 10 minute speeches, and from 9 pm through till 10, speaking times would go down to five minutes.

So far, each time we've done this we've never actually made it to 10 pm. I've always made sure that, whoever the minister responsible for the legislation is, they end up being the person in the chair. This means that tomorrow night it'll be me. The way the resolution is drafted, there's no automatic adjournment at 10 pm, so, if there are still a few more people speaking, then, subject to making sure that, for the people who work in the building, we don't go for an inordinate amount of time, we'll be sensible, in terms of not using 10 pm as an absolute, hard cut-off time. The intention is to try to make sure that we can get the bill through this week and have as many people as possible able to speak.

On Thursday morning, the second reading vote would occur, so that obviously means that tomorrow night, even though we're sitting late, if you're not speaking, from 6.30 on there are no further divisions you'll be required for. So, from 6.30 pm onwards tomorrow, if people are not speaking, they would be able to leave the building safely, subject to the permission of their whip; I'd never recommend against that. Then, on Thursday morning, we'll have the vote on the second reading, followed by an in-detail stage. There is a provision within the resolution that, after the debate has been going for 10 minutes on each amendment, it can be required that the question be put, but, once again, if we have a large number of amendments then we'll have to regulate the time on that. If we don't have a large number of amendments then I expect the discussion on each of them may well go for significantly more time than that.

What this means is that, when the Senate returns for the final fortnight, this bill will be one of the many bills from the House of Representatives that await them. Those opposite, particularly those former ministers opposite, know, as do I, that once things get to the Senate we never quite understand what the process is from then on. I can see some people nodding. But I want to make sure that, at the beginning of their final fortnight, they have the opportunity to have this bill in front of them.

The priority for this bill and the reason that we want to be able to deal with this quickly have been well ventilated both within the House and within the media. Australians are facing real pressures. Part of that is prices and part of that is wages. This gives us an opportunity to do something about wages, and I'm hoping that the parliament, both this house and the other, are able to act on that as quickly as possible.

See this speech in context