Jodie Campbell (Bass, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. Will the minister update the House on the timing of the implementation of the government’s laws to end the making of Australian workplace agreements, a key part of Labor’s fair, flexible and balanced industrial relations system?

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Bass for her question. Of course, as members of the House are aware, the government was elected on the basis of its policy Forward with Fairness, a new workplace relations system for the Australian nation. The bill before the House, the Workplace Relations Amendment (Transition to Forward with Fairness) Bill 2008, is the first part of the government’s plans to ensure that fair, flexible and balanced workplace relations system. It would, of course, end forever the ability of anyone in this country to make an Australian workplace agreement, and we know that Australian workplace agreements have hurt Australian working families by taking away hard-earned pay and conditions. This matter is not only before the House but before a Senate inquiry due to report on 17 March. It is the government’s intention, when that Senate inquiry reports, to have the bill dealt with by both houses of parliament prior to the House rising before Easter. This will enable the bill to be proclaimed into law shortly after Easter and to deliver on one of the government’s important election commitments, to end the making of Australian workplace agreements.

The Australian people voted for this at the last election. They know what they want. The Australian government—the Rudd Labor government—knows where it stands. We stand behind our policy, Forward with Fairness. Unfortunately, the opposition have been unable to articulate a coherent position on Labor’s bill, and I am concerned that their dithering and vacillation will mean that there is a delay in dealing with this bill before the parliament.

Mr Speaker, can I direct your and the House’s attention to an article by Steve Lewis published on 23 February. In that article, Mr Lewis reported that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said that, when it came to defending Australian workplace agreements, her colleagues the member for North Sydney and the member for Warringah ‘went to water’. Having read that article, I thought that clearly the Deputy Leader of the Opposition stood firmly behind AWAs and firmly behind Work Choices. One would have to give her points for bravery. A bit like the Black Knight in Monty Python, she was going to fight on—that election loss was ‘just a flesh wound’. She was going to defend Work Choices. Then, last week, this belief that the opposition stood behind Work Choices and AWAs was further reinforced when the former Prime Minister gave a speech in the United States defending Work Choices and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition described it as an excellent speech. One could only conclude from that statement that they were going to fight on in defence of AWAs and in defence of Work Choices.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, a point of order on relevance: my recollection of the question is that it did not ask for alternative views and I ask you to bring the Deputy Prime Minister back to the question that was asked of her.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question related to an update to the timing and implementation of the laws. The Deputy Prime Minister will address her response to that aspect of the question.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am addressing the matter of timing because of course the timing is contingent on the bill going through the parliament. Whether or not quick passage of this bill is going to be facilitated depends in part on the position of the opposition. It is a material fact to the question of timing.

Then we got a different position from the opposition—hence the confusion and hence the risk to timing—on the weekend, when the Deputy Leader of the Opposition appeared on national television and said that the opposition did not support but did not oppose the government’s bill. Is this a riddle that we are supposed to puzzle out? What is the meaning of this nonsense? By the standard of these contributions, the next thing that we will hear from the opposition—and I am surprised that we did not hear it today on climate change—is them wandering out telling age-old riddles like, ‘If a tree falls down in a forest and no-one’s there does it make a sound?’ That will be the next quality contribution.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat. The Deputy Prime Minister will bring her answer to a close.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the question of timing, what we are seeking is a straightforward answer from the opposition to a very simple question. It is not a trick question. It is not a hard question. It is a simple question. The question is: if a division on Labor’s bill is caused to be held—

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Those on my left are not assisting. The Deputy Prime Minister will not debate the answer and she will bring it to a close.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

in either house of parliament will the opposition vote for the bill, against the bill or will they try to hide in the corner hoping that no-one notices that they are still supporters of Work Choices? That is a key question on the timing of the bill. It is a question the Australian people, who voted for fairness and certainty in workplaces, are entitled to an answer to.