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

I rise to also support this amendment. In talking on supporting this amendment, I'd first like to point out that the government has shown that it has been willing to listen and to make amendments to this bill. As a matter of fact, it's been prepared to do so at such a rate that it is proving to be highly embarrassing for the government. I can't remember a piece of legislation in recent memory where there have been 150 amendments, and we're beginning to count. I'm glad the minister's here because the number of amendments—150—shows that he hasn't done his work, he hasn't done his job. He hasn't consulted, and one of the areas he clearly hasn't consulted on is the number of employees that constitute a small business. As the minister should know, there is a wide variety of regulations and rules around what constitutes a small business.

This legislation will have an enormous impact on small business because it will see unions for the first time be able to walk in the front doors of small businesses. This law makes sure that they have taken the smallest and the narrowest definition possible for small business. As previous speakers have mentioned, this comes at a time when small businesses are facing pressures, the likes of which they haven't seen for decades. They're seeing rising electricity and gas prices. They're seeing rising regulatory burdens being placed upon them. And now they're going to confront this new workforce legislation and multi-employer bargaining, which hasn't been properly defined. Small businesses have no idea what multi-employer bargaining will mean for them and their staff. So I say to the government: this legislation has been embarrassing enough for you. Now is the time for you to go back and, in particular, liaise and discuss with all the relevant employer organisations about what should constitute the definition of a small business, what the size of a small business should be. It's clear that right across this House we're saying, 'You've got it wrong.' Like you have with the other 150 amendments that you've had to make where you've admitted you've got it wrong, you've got this wrong as well. So I say to the minister: enough's enough. Enough errors in this bill. Enough harm. Enough damage. You're already doing enough. Let's not go even further.

When it comes to the size of a small business, you should be looking at the number of regulations or amendments you've put in place—150—and, at a minimum, defining a small business as someone with 150 employees. Here, we're suggesting a lesser number than that but one which would mean that the damage this bill will do to small business will not impact on real small businesses. I say to the minister: enough's enough. It's time to admit that this legislation goes too far. It's time to admit that the damage this will do to small business, especially in the limited definition of 'small business' and the number of employees that a small business has, needs to change.

There are organisations that would happily step you through this. Go and discuss this with COSBOA, who have had a bit of an awakening throughout this process. Go and talk to ACCI, who would also happily step you through what a definition of a small business should be. Understand the impact, the regulatory burden and the uncertainty that you will be placing on small business if you go forward with this. The House is sending you a clear message, Minister: you've got this wrong. You've admitted 150 times already, through making amendments, that you've got it wrong. Let's make it 151 and do the right thing by small business.

See this speech in context