Kim Beazley (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister aware that, of the 20 MPIs and censure debates on the subject of industrial relations moved since October 2005 in this House, he has participated in none of them? Is the Prime Minister also aware of the following exchange with the Catholic Archbishop of Sydney, Cardinal Pell, yesterday? Journalist: ‘So would you encourage Mr Beazley’s debate on this to take place?’ Cardinal Pell: ‘Debate is always, always useful.’ Given that the Prime Minister has not had the courage to debate me on industrial relations, one on one, in this House, will the Prime Minister now agree to have an industrial relations debate with me in the car park of the Coffs Harbour Spotlight store?

John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. I think the most appropriate way to reply to him is to say that, in the last 30 years, on both sides no Prime Minister has attended more question times for longer periods of time and answered more questions than I have.

Mark Baker (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is addressed to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister aware of misleading claims being made about the operation of the new workplace relations system? If so, what is the extent of these claims?

John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Braddon for his question. The answer is yes. The latest example appears to have been the member for Perth in relation to a company called Esselte, and I seek the permission of the House to take the House through some of the detail of this. Last Thursday in this place the member for Perth, brandishing what was purported to be an AWA, asked the following question:

Isn’t it the case that this AWA leaves a full-time employee—

of Esselte—

working a Saturday shift $65 a week, or $10,140 over three years, worse off?

That was the claim. According to a statement from the company, released today, the facts are different from those suggested by the member for Perth. Amongst other things this is what the company had to say:

The management of Esselte understands that the $65 pay cut allegation was raised in connection with Saturday work. Esselte does not regularly work any of its employees on a Saturday.

It went on to say:

Esselte has never engaged a person to work their regular hours on a Saturday.

So, on the basis of the member for Perth’s claim, that particular claim is false. Further, Esselte said:

At certain times of the year, due to increases in warehouse volumes, the existing full-time warehouse staff are asked to work Saturdays on an as-required basis. This Saturday work is voluntary and has always been in addition to the employee’s week hours and is worked at overtime rates of pay.

The AWA that was offered to Esselte staff increased the minimum hourly rate to $18.39 an hour, compared with the collective agreement of $17.39 an hour, and also compared with the relevant award, which had a rate of $13.78 an hour. On the basis of a calculation along the lines of that made by the member for Perth of an employee working 38 ordinary hours and three hours overtime, they would actually be $27 a week better off, not $65 a week worse off, and $4,000 better off over the three-year period.

I understand that the agreement offered included increases in wages, increases in some allowances and an increase in sick leave provisions. On Saturday, one of Australia’s most respected union figures, Mr Joe de Bruyn, had something to say about people taking liberties with the truth in the industrial relations debate. That was referring to Spotlight; it may well also have referred to Esselte.

Wilson Tuckey (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Tuckey interjecting

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for O’Connor is warned!

Stephen Smith (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Industry, Infrastructure and Industrial Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is also to the Prime Minister. I refer to his previous answer and I also refer him to a letter to the editor of the Australian newspaper by Mr de Bruyn:

I am writing to express my deep concern at the misrepresentation of my views in the Australian ... At no stage during the interview with you did I say that Labor Party spokespersons had ‘taken a lot of liberties with the facts’ in their statement on the Spotlight AWAs.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Pyne interjecting

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Sturt is warned.

5V5 Smith, Stephen, MPMr STEPHEN SMITH—I also refer the Prime Minister to the following exchange with Laurie Oakes on the Sunday program yesterday:

LAURIE OAKES: You quote Joe de Bruyn as an authority. I mean, he said that Mrs Harris wasn’t losing $90 a week, but she would certainly lose money ... She would certainly lose money ... he said that ... those who worked across the weekend five days full time-would lose $95 a week. Everybody else would lose some money a week under the Spotlight agreement. That is pretty devastating, isn’t it?

JOHN HOWARD: … I can’t—

Order! Would the member for Perth please come to his question?

Stephen Smith (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Industry, Infrastructure and Industrial Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Perth will come to his question.

Honourable Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Stephen Smith (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Industry, Infrastructure and Industrial Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If I am uninterrupted, I will be able to. The exchange continued:

JOHN HOWARD: … I can’t in relation to every individual case, I can’t pretend to know all of the facts.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Perth is debating an issue. He will come to his question.

Stephen Smith (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Industry, Infrastructure and Industrial Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Prime Minister, isn’t it the case that what Spotlight employees lose under the 2c-an-hour AWA may vary, but whether it is $40, $60 or $80 a week they have got one thing in common—they all lose?

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, during the course of that diatribe—

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Mackellar will come to her point of order.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

you warned him, and asked him to come back to his question. He then did not—in the face of your ruling. He is totally out of order.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Mackellar is aware that I called for the member for Perth to come to his question. He then came to his question.

John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In answer to the member for Perth, let me simply say this: Joe de Bruyn pinned you, and nothing you can say alters that fact.

Stephen Smith (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Industry, Infrastructure and Industrial Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Stephen Smith interjecting

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Perth has asked his question.

John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like the member for Perth to address the case. I would like the member for Perth to explain to the House how it is that he can get up and make an allegation that somebody is $65 a week worse off when, with a bit of research based on what the company has said, that person is in fact $27 a week better off. That kind of misrepresentation is of a piece with the misrepresentation of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition was trying to establish that Teys Bros were deliberately refusing to give Aussie workers a job, when in reality they had not only advertised but also gone to the union and asked the union to provide some Australian workers, and the union could not do so. What the opposition is doing on this issue is deliberately distorting the facts in order to create fear and hostility in the community.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You know all about that!

John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They always do that. They did it with the GST and it failed. They are doing it with this. I reckon they are going to fail on this as well.