Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Indeed, I say that with sarcasm in inverted commas. They promised they would have an agricultural visa. In fact, they were going around with the National Farmers Federation saying 100,000 people would come here with no TSMIT, no industrial protection, for workers. That's what they were going around doing. They got elected in 2013. They announced in 2018 that they would have this agricultural visa. Of course, Prime Minister Turnbull didn't want to have a bar of it. They announced it in 2018 and what happened? Nothing happened. In 2021, the now Leader of the Opposition—he was the immigration minister at the time—started running around the countryside saying for months that the promised ag visa would be up by Christmas. What happened? Nothing at all. How many workers came by Christmas 2021? None—not one. How many workers had come by the election in 2022? None—nil. None came. Those opposite were in power for nine years and had done absolutely nothing by the 2022 election. And they proceed to give us lectures about getting this ag visa.

There were shocking examples of exploitation in the sector. We saw unions and other people who were interested in this sector talking about what was going on in the sector. But did those opposite protect anyone? Did they do anything about protection? No. I had forums all around the country, from Melbourne to Brisbane, talking to migrant workers in the sector who were being ripped off, and those opposite did nothing. They come in here and say it was all wonderful during the glory days when, in fact, they did nothing. Now we've been in power for 18 months and have reformed the PALM Scheme. That's what we're doing: creating a well-run visa system, including the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility Scheme. We're going to do it the right way. How about you protect workers in the sector? How about you make sure you give a helping hand to the farming sector so that farmers get access to not just the workers but their families to work in the sector? That's what we're doing. How about you make sure that our relationship with the Pacific is enhanced and improved? How about you make sure that those farming communities are sustained, and you don't just run off at the mouth and say, 'We should do something about it,' as so many people opposite did during those nine dark years when they were actually in office.

Now we're in power and we've reformed the scheme. There are about 38,000 people who come to this country under the PALM Scheme, and it's growing all the time. This is good for our relations with the Pacific. It's good for our relations in the farming sector. Those opposite proceed to talk about regional Australia. How about they prioritise those ag visas for regional Australia? None were prioritised. We are doing that in the PALM Scheme. It's not just about aged care, which is another area; agricultural communities like in my electorate of Blair, up in the Brisbane Valley and rural Ipswich, get prioritised by what we're doing in the PALM Scheme. Those opposite spent the best part of a decade undermining and devaluing the administration of the visa system, doing not a single thing in this space to help farming communities, doing nothing to stamp out the unfair practices in the sector and doing nothing to support those regional communities by making sure that the workers that they needed in their workplaces were there.

The member for Nicholls talked about Mr David Turvey, the acting Jobs and Skills Commissioner. I see he was quoted in the Australian in relation to this matter. Don't let a headline or, indeed, a motion get in the way of the facts. Mr Turvey did not say at all that there should be a special agriculture visa. If you listen to what he had to say, he did not say that at all. Of course, he's been fitted up in this motion. This motion also claims the agriculture sector was in contention for the lowest tier visa announced by the government after the review of the migration scheme. However, the government's migration strategy clearly states that it does not propose a special agricultural visa. Rather, it identifies that further consultation be undertaken on a more regulated pathway for low paid workers with essential skills and the role of the Working Holiday Maker program, both of which will take into consideration skills needs in the agricultural sector. So we're prioritising the agriculture sector. Those opposite over nine dark years did nothing.

See this speech in context