Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Hansard source

We know what multi-employer bargaining is all about. It's about the Labor Party paying its masters. That's what it is about. Nothing else. Let's look at the facts. There was no election mandate, and there is no election mandate, when it comes to multi-employer bargaining. There was no mention of it—none; not one mention of it—before the election, apart from the Treasurer saying that they would not introduce multi-employer bargaining and that it was not part of the government's agenda. That was the only mention of multi-employer bargaining.

So let's be very clear: there's no election mandate for it, there is no evidence in any way that it will benefit the economy, and there has not been one skerrick of evidence produced by the government as to why it needs to be introduced. Why isn't there economic modelling which says there is a need for multi-employer bargaining? We know why. It's because they don't want to do it. If the government were serious about trying to address real wages, then they would take the time to ensure that the policies that they're putting in place were evidence based and were going to do the exact thing that they want them to do. Yet there is no economic modelling on these changes. Why not? They're too scared to do the modelling and to see the results or the outcome that this might produce.

The one piece of economic modelling which has been done was done on real wages in the budget. And what happens to real wages in the budget? They continue to go down. And what will happen as a result of the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill? Well, we don't know whether it will further exacerbate real wages going down, because no modelling has been done. Do we know whether this reform will be productivity enhancing? No, we don't. As a matter of fact, every single indication is that it will not be productivity enhancing and that it will do the complete opposite.

It is in the non-traded parts of our economy where we need to see productivity lifting, yet this bill will do nothing to address that. As a matter of fact, it will more than likely lead to that non-tradeable part of our economy seeing more damage being done to its productivity rather than it being enhanced. If the government is serious about this bill, it needs to pull it. It needs to go back to the start. It needs to start by saying: what do we need to improve productivity in this nation, especially in the non-tradeable parts of this economy, and what are the reforms that we need to put in place to make sure that we lift productivity? This bill does not do this. Why? It is because there has been no consultation.

We had the minister today in question time trying to argue that he had consulted. He ran off this list of organisations that he said he had consulted with, yet every single one of the organisations he said he'd consulted with is opposed to the bill. So how have you consulted, when every single organisation that you've consulted with is opposed to the bill? It shows that your consultation has been a complete farce. And we know it has been a complete farce, because this bill hasn't been cooked up to try to enhance productivity in this nation; it hasn't been cooked up by bringing business and the unions together to try to make sure that productivity-enhancing laws are put in place in this nation. It was cooked up at that so-called jobs summit to keep the unions quiet. They were told, 'Come along. Be part of the gabfest and you'll be looked after.' And have they been looked after! Absolutely, they have been.

It goes to the heart of it that John Setka is the greatest supporter of this new government. This is what he had to say, and you can see the smile on his face as he said it:

Without going the early crow, I'm hoping that this government is going to be different (from the Rudd-Gillard governments) and from what I've seen so far I'm quietly confident.

Our next EBA negotiations are now not going to be restricted to shit clauses and we will have the power to go after the non-union sites …

He summed it up pretty well, John Setka, and that is exactly what this bill is going do. It is not only going to allow the CFMMEU to do all that but enable unions right across economy to do so too. And that will not enhance productivity in one way in this nation. One of the groups that the minister said he consulted with was Ai Group. Here's what Ai Group said about this bill: they said it would result in 'more strikes, fewer jobs, centralised decision-making and less trust within our enterprises'. That's completely and utterly damning, yet the minister says that he consulted—what an absolute farce.

What will this legislation do in a nutshell? It's going to lead to more strikes and job losses. Why would the government want to do this when their budget already points to the fact that we're going to see more job losses? This bill will mean that there will be more job losses on top of the job losses that will be occurring over the next 12 to 24 months. It will allow unions into small businesses, which have never had to deal with them before. Small businesses right across our economy who've never had to worry about unions and who are dealing, let's be fair, with enough red tape and regulation from local, state and federal government are now going to have to deal with the union movement coming in their front doors on top of all that. We are going to see more strikes and job losses and small businesses having to deal with unions coming through their front doors. We're going to see wages rises actually held up because of increased complexities and delays. And everyone right across the board—all the business organisations who've been consulted—clearly state that these laws are complex.

This legislation is going to undermine competition, so Australians will have fewer choices but face higher costs. And it's going to turn on its head the whole way that enterprise bargaining works in this nation. This is a bad bill which is going to make a tough situation for all Australians, which this government has done nothing to address, even worse. And let's be very clear: it is flawed legislation based on deception before the election, when the government made very clear it would not look at going anywhere near the type of multi-employer bargaining that the government is now introducing. And there is no economic modelling whatsoever that shows that this in any way is going to be productive— (Time expired)

See this speech in context