Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister aware that Tristar in my electorate has an enterprise bargaining agreement which expires on 30 September and allows for four weeks redundancy pay per year of service? Is the Prime Minister also aware that the workforce has been reduced from 300 to 60 because there is no work to do and the factory is facing closure? Is the Prime Minister aware that Tristar is refusing to guarantee that it will not use the Work Choices legislation to avoid these redundancy provisions after 30 September? What does the Prime Minister say to the 60 remaining workers at Tristar, including Simon, who has 32 years of service and stands to have his redundancy of $160,000 reduced to just 12 weeks pay after 30 September? Given the refusal of the company to meet with local representatives about these issues, will the Prime Minister use his office to ensure that the Work Choices legislation—

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

The member for Sturt is warned!

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

is not used to reduce these redundancy payouts to these great, hardworking Australians?

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

The answer to the member for Grayndler is: no, I am not aware of the facts and circumstances. As always, I will check what the member has said. Clearly, we will expect the obligations of this company, like all other companies, under the law to be met. You mentioned redundancies. I seem to remember you had 13 years to fix a redundancy safety net and you never did.

Phillip Barresi (Deakin, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is addressed to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. Would the minister advise the House of the benefits of workplace reforms for Australian workers? Is the minister aware of any misleading claims about employment agreements offered to employees at Lufthansa?

Kevin Andrews (Menzies, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the honourable member for Deakin for his question. I note at the outset that in the 138 days since Work Choices has been in operation 159,000 jobs have been created in Australia. That is an average of more than 1,000 jobs per day—something which the member for Deakin and I are very proud of. Despite this creation of jobs and a record low unemployment rate of 4.8 per cent, we continue to have a misleading and deceptive campaign by the ACTU and the ALP about Work Choices.

The latest of these cases in which they have been caught red-handed with misleading information involved, as the member for Deakin asked me about, employees at Lufthansa. Sharan Burrow, the President of the ACTU—and I remind the House that Sharan Burrow was the woman who, at the outset of this misleading campaign, made the infamous comment that it would be desirable to have the grieving family of a dead or injured worker to help their campaign; that is what Ms Burrow said at the start of this campaign and that set the tone for everything that has followed since in a misleading campaign—said yesterday about this matter at Lufthansa that the employees were denied the right of union representation. She said, and I quote from the transcript of her interview, ‘And refused point-blank when they asked for the union to be involved.’

This was what was peddled by the President of the ACTU yesterday, and it is simply plain wrong. The very respected legal firm Blake Dawson Waldron, one of the most respected legal firms in Australia, wrote to the Victorian Workplace Rights Advocate in relation to this matter.

Lindsay Tanner (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Tanner interjecting

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

The member for Melbourne is warned!

Kevin Andrews (Menzies, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I quote from part of the letter written by Blakes, one of the most respected law firms in Australia, to the Victorian Workplace Rights Advocate:

The complaint investigated by you is not one made by an employee of GTS. No employee has sought to appoint the ASU—

the Australian Services Union—

as a bargaining agent in relation to an AWA. No employee has complained to you that the operation of an AWA has adversely affected them.

So much for the false information from the President of the ACTU that the unions were denied involvement. Indeed, Blakes go on to say:

There is questionable legitimacy in a complaint which is divorced from the opinions of employees who have the opportunity of agreeing or not agreeing to the terms of the AWA.

Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Brendan O’Connor interjecting

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

The member for Gorton is warned!

Kevin Andrews (Menzies, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I table that letter from Blake Dawson Waldron. Beyond this, we have the hypocrisy of the ACTU—Mr Combet in particular and the member for Perth and others from the Labor Party—on the matter of penalty rates, because the member for Perth was saying, ‘Isn’t this a disaster that there is some trading of penalty rates going on in relation to this particular matter.’ Trading of penalty rates is hardly new. Indeed, let me read you a quote:

Who do you think might have said that? Who was it that negotiated these changes in penalty rates? None other than the Secretary of the ACTU, Mr Greg Combet himself. So Mr Combet is on record as saying he has been personally involved in the negotiation in relation to penalty rates, and yet the member for Perth comes in here yesterday and says, ‘Isn’t this a disaster that there was a negotiation of penalty rates.’ What is most bizarre about this particular case and this allegation is that the Australian Labor Party, once the party of workers in Australia, is actually standing in the way of employees at this particular business achieving a 12 to 13 per cent increase in their wages.

So we have got to the bizarre situation in the ACTU campaign that the ACTU and the Australian Labor Party, if they had their way, would actually deny workers a 12 to 13 per cent increase in their wages. Why is it that the Leader of the Opposition is so opposed to Australian workplace agreements? Why is it that he wants to rip them up when they can lead to desirable outcomes for workers, such as a 12 or 13 per cent increase in their wages? It can only be because of the vested interests of the union movement, who are ideologically opposed to Australian workplace agreements. I began this answer by recounting the fact that 159,000 jobs have been created in Australia in the last 138 days. There is no doubt about which parties represent the workers in this country.