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

I have received a letter from the honourable member for Moncrieff proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The Government’s failure to provide job security for working Australians.

I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Small Business, the Service Economy and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am especially pleased there are so many members in the chamber for this matter of public importance, because it is important that we look at the Rudd Labor government’s inability to provide job security for working Australians, those Australians who the Rudd Labor government said were front and centre at its election in November last year. What is crystal clear is that in the period since the Rudd Labor government was elected we have seen that the rhetoric has fallen away, the empty promises have fallen away, and what the Australian people have been left with is a government that is directionless when it comes to providing job security for Australians.

There was one fundamental promise that the Howard government gave when it was in office, and that promise was to ensure that unemployment would be driven down. Fundamentally, the coalition took the view that there was one core principle that the coalition could always be counted on to deliver—and that was lower unemployment. In fact, thanks to the policies of the Howard government, we saw a 33-year record low of unemployment. It had been 33 years since the Australian people had seen unemployment reach levels as low as they did under the Howard government. And it was no thanks to the Labor Party, no thanks at all.

On every key reform that was fundamental to ensuring that we brought down unemployment, we knew one thing from the Labor Party, and that was opposition, opposition, opposition. It was on every key reform, and we remember because we are rapidly approaching ‘fundamental injustice day’. We all remember ‘fundamental injustice day’. That was the day our Prime Minister said would be the day that descended upon the Australian people as a result of our new tax system. That is Labor’s rhetoric: ‘fundamental injustice day’.

The coalition’s policy in this area—and, most importantly, the coalition’s results in this area—was to provide job security for Australians, because the coalition knew that with the record 33-year low level of unemployment we were providing more Australians than ever before the chance to pay off their home, the chance to pay off their car, the chance to make sure that their kids could get a decent education and the chance to pay for private medical insurance or use the public system. In so many areas, we knew that the most fundamental workplace right of all was the right to a job, and that is something that the Australian Labor Party just does not understand.

What we know is that the Australian Labor Party is more concerned about the rights of someone who is unemployed than they are about the rights of someone to actually get a job. We see Labor Party policy absolutely reflect this. In so many respects, we have seen this new government since its election completely lose its way. As a result, we are seeing that there are so many Australians who are already feeling the dead weight of the government’s actions. Most importantly, we see this dead weight in terms of the government’s forecasts.

What we saw over a long period was the unemployment trend going down. And what do we know? Within six months we have seen the government’s own budget forecasts actually forecasting 134,000 Australians to lose their jobs. That is the government’s record in six months in office—134,000 fewer working families as a result of your government policies. To compound the problem, what we know about the Rudd Labor government’s policies is that consumer confidence and small business confidence have absolutely collapsed. I am pleased that the Minister for Small Business, Independent Contractors and the Service Economy is at the table today, because he has got some explaining to do.

The minister has got some explaining to do for the policies that his government has implemented—the very policies that will put 134,000 Australians out of a job. That is the result of Labor Party policies. When members opposite sit in here on their cushy seats after they have made the transition from the trade union movement into politics, very few of them have any small business background. When they make that transition from their cushy trade union jobs to the cushy couches of government, what do we know? We know that the fundamental disconnect between their experience in the real world and Labor policy continues today. That is what we know about Labor Party policy.

There is a fundamental disconnection between the actual drivers of the economy and what drives the Labor Party. We on this side know what drives the Labor Party. It is the trade union movement. They are owned, they are operated and they are a franchise of the Australian trade union movement, and what we know is that in order to serve the interests of the trade union movement, unfortunately, there is going to be a bit of road kill on the way. And that road kill is the 134,000 Australians who this side of politics would always stand up for—those 134,000 Australians who we put into work and that you are now going to put out of work. They are who we will stand up for and they are the reason why we will make sure that our policies always create a positive small business environment.

James Bidgood (Dawson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Bidgood interjecting

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Dawson has had a good go!

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Small Business, the Service Economy and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What is extraordinary is that the members of the Labor Party stand there and sing this ongoing refrain and rhetoric about how inflation is at the highest level it has been. We hear the Australian Labor Party continuously make comments about inflation being at the highest level it has been for 16 years. There are lots of facts in this regard, and I would like to educate the small business minister and those opposite about this issue of inflation.

Inflation is tied directly to the economic capacity of the country. Inflation is tied directly to the economic strength and the growth of the country. And, thanks to the former coalition government, and the fact that it did more to drive economic growth, did more to drive the utilisation of capacity, did more to drive unemployment down, did more to drive investment in business and did more to drive an overall increase in consumer growth, those things actually resulted in a strong economy that was the envy of the world.

What do we know about the Australian Labor Party? We know that their attempt to reduce inflation will not be to actually do something constructive but will be to slow down the Australian economy to such a point that Australians are thrown on the unemployment scrapheap. That is what we know about Labor Party policy when it comes to inflation. They have no real ability to tackle the problem through increasing capacity, but rather only an ability to tackle the problem by making sure that they throw Australians back on the scrapheap.

What is also clear about Labor Party policy is that there will be a very negative and ongoing consequence for some time, because this is just the beginning when it comes to a lack of consumer confidence. When the coalition lost office in November last year, the small business sector had an attitude towards the government that found that, on the whole, there was a net positive. A net positive number of small businesses felt that the federal government’s policies were actually good for their business—in fact, a net positive of 29 per cent.

By May of this year, that net positive of 29 per cent had swung around by 53 per cent to being a net negative of 24 per cent. What does that mean? That means that more small businesses now believe that the federal government’s policies are bad for their business. You will not hear the minister talk about that. The minister will not address that issue. The minister will talk about international economic circumstances. The minister will talk about domestic circumstances. But the minister will not talk about one key fact, and that is that the Sensis small business index shows that when it comes to small business policies, the federal government’s policies are destroying small business. That is what is crystal clear from the Sensis small business index.

That is in stark contrast with the legacy that was left by the Howard government. As the small business policies of this new Labor government are rolled out, as small business owners are forced to deal with the by-product and unexpected ramifications of these ill-conceived, short-sighted and myopic federal Labor policies, we know that they will lay off workers. They will not take the risk. If you want to see a case in point, I draw your attention to the tourism industry. Very recently we saw in Australia’s key small business industry the arguments put forward by the Minister for Tourism on why the tourism industry was doing it tough—the high Aussie dollar, exceptionally competitive destinations and every other country in this region growing more rapidly than Australia. As a result we have seen airline capacity cuts because of decreased demand. We have seen a record high oil price, which has also meant that the airlines have been struggling with the increase in the fuel cost. What was the Rudd Labor government’s solution for an industry that is doing it very tough? They imposed $1 billion of new tourism taxes on an industry that the minister acknowledges is doing it particularly tough—and I am not surprised that the member for Leichhardt is not in the chamber. We know that the member for Leichhardt has a bit of a propensity to sneak off early. We know that he likes to scoot off early.

Most fundamentally it is time the Australian people looked the Rudd Labor government in the eye and asked, ‘When an industry is down on its knees, when an industry is doing it tough with record high fuel prices, when an industry is struggling under the weight of a high Aussie dollar, how can a Labor government possibly say, ‘Here is $1 billion of new tourism taxes and we are here to help’? Kevin is not ‘from Queensland and here to help’; Kevin is from Queensland and here to impose $1 billion worth of new taxes—

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member will refer to the Prime Minister appropriately.

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Small Business, the Service Economy and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

and ensure that there are more than 134,000 people thrown on the unemployment scrap heap. That will be Labor’s legacy in the first six months and I am concerned that it is only going to get worse.

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Finance Minister on Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We had a spectacle here in the Australian parliament just a few moments ago when the ‘Foghorn Leghorn’ of the Australian parliament, the member for Moncrieff, who is very proud of himself, got up and said, ‘I’m very impressed with myself.’ So impressive is he that he could not get eight of his colleagues to stand up and agree that this was a matter of public importance. Most of his colleagues did not agree that it was a matter of public importance. They stayed away in droves. They had to call a quorum as a contrivance in order for the member for Moncrieff and shadow minister to get enough colleagues to come in—under duress and whipped into a fever by the Opposition Whip—and say that, reluctantly, they did agree that this is a matter of public importance.

Of course the future of the Australian economy is indeed very important. The shadow minister was telling us about a number of surveys that have been released recently and I will just go through a couple of them. The National Australia Bank quarterly business survey, in reference to a fall in investment intentions and business confidence, referred to high interest rates. The Dun and Bradstreet national business expectation survey referred to a combination of high interest rates and market turmoil. The SAR global ACCI survey shows that high interest rates and ongoing financial sector turmoil have significantly dented business confidence. The Australian Retailers Association survey released just a couple of days ago refers to rising interest rates and another released today again refers to rising interest rates.

They all have this issue in common: why have interest rates risen 12 times since 2002? The reason is that the Reserve Bank is very worried about inflation, and when it worries about inflation it increases interest rates. This opposition, when in government, allowed inflationary pressures to build up from 2002 right through to November 2007 and onto the current period and did nothing to ease those inflationary pressures. That is why small business confidence is being affected and business confidence generally is being affected. We know that high inflation, giving course to high interest rates, is public enemy No. 1 for small business and the business community in general. What is the official view of the opposition about inflation? We heard the shadow Treasurer today saying that inflation is a problem. This is a revelation. I have never heard the shadow Treasurer say that inflation is a problem; indeed, he said it is a fairytale. The Leader of the Opposition described inflation as a charade. But the absolute spending binge that the coalition engaged in is what has caused inflationary pressures. It has been a never-ending tea party!

We heard the member for Higgins, upon the release of the then Prime Minister’s memoirs, say to colleagues, ‘I offered him the menu and he took the entree, the main course, the dessert and the vegetarian option.’ Such was the spending binge of the previous government—and it has fallen on the Rudd government to rein in that extravagant government spending. This was a never-ending tea party where there was fairytale economics. Fairytale economics was practised by members opposite because, remember, inflation is a fairytale. In this Mad Hatter’s tea party, the more you spend the more you have to spend. In fairytale economics they do not believe that it is the Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia who sets interest rates but the gnomes of Zurich in a faraway country called Switzerland. These people are on another planet. They have presided over the building up of inflationary pressures and, in doing so, they created a situation where there have been 10 interest rate rises in a row. That was the judgement the Governor of the Reserve Bank delivered on the economic policies of the coalition government. We will always remember the then Prime Minister in the 2004 election promising to keep interest rates—

Government Members:

At record lows!

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Finance Minister on Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

at record lows. But they went up and up and up. As a consequence of that, we have these inflationary pressures. If you want an endorsement of this government’s fiscal policies, of our responsible economic policy, you need go no further than the OECD. In a report released a little while ago in relation to the budget, the OECD said that the stabilising role that fiscal policy should play is welcome. The OECD welcomes it, but not the member opposite, not the shadow Treasurer, not the opposition leader—he does not welcome it. In relation to budget policy, the report concludes that fiscal policy is slightly restrictive—that is, it is working to reduce the pressure on inflation and therefore on interest rates.

What does the shadow Treasurer say in relation to the budget? He said that it is inflationary. So you have got the shadow Treasurer saying that it is inflationary, that it is an expansionary budget and that it has got too much spending, and you have got the OECD saying quite the opposite. The shadow Treasurer does not know what he is talking about and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition does not know what she is talking about. They are all engaged in this Mad Hatter’s tea party.

I notice the website of the shadow Treasurer. I had a good look through that website. I looked and looked and I rang my office and we looked and looked. We were looking for a link to the budget reply from the opposition leader. Where is Brendan? I could not find any reference. They have no regard to responsible economic policy in this country, no regard whatsoever.

This is a government that is working to bring down inflation and therefore to bring downward pressure on interest rates. We are doing it through a responsible fiscal policy. You are off on your Mad Hatter’s tea party with the March Hare and the Dormouse and Alice and the Mad Hatter. They are all sitting over there having their never-ending tea party. Why don’t you get on board and get your grubby hands off the surplus! That is what you are doing—irresponsibly raiding the surplus. If you cannot cooperate in getting good economic policy implemented in Australia then get out of the road and let us get on and govern this country and invest in Australia’s future by creating a strong economy, a modern economy, to meet the challenges of the 21st century.

Andrew Southcott (Boothby, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment Participation and Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In an MPI based on job security the previous speaker could not utter the J word—jobs. Back in the day when he was the economic adviser to Bob Hawke they used to talk all the time about the numbers of jobs that had been created. I have a suspicion—more than a suspicion—that we will not be hearing about job creation over the next 12 months. That is not something we will be hearing from the Prime Minister; it is not something we will be hearing from the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations; it is not something we will be hearing from any of the frontbench. I think it is a damning indictment of one of the ministers of the current government and it is a let-down for the people who voted for you that you could not address the issue of job security in an MPI on job security.

The government has a plan to destroy 134,000 jobs. It will not be job creation; it will be job destruction. In 12 months time there will be, on your own forecasts, 134,000 fewer jobs. What I have to report is that the Labor Party are on track to meet their own job destruction target. They have already taken out almost 20,000 jobs in the month of May. So in a month when the Treasurer delivered his budget, we had 19,700 fewer jobs at the end of May than we had at the beginning of May. So Labor are on track. I might point out this is the last time we will have detailed labour force data from the ABS. It is one of the things they have cut back. They are not going to be producing job vacancy data anymore and they are reducing the size of the labour force survey.

When we look at the industries that are shedding jobs under this new regime, on seasonally adjusted figures over the last three months, from February to May, the construction industry has shed 10,200 jobs, wholesale trade has shed 19,800 jobs and the retail trade has shed 5,200 jobs. Under the watch of the Minister for Small Business, Independent Contractors and the Service Economy, who is responsible for things like wholesale trade, retail trade and so on, there is no mention of these industries and the jobs they have been shedding. Since the government was elected we have seen a number of businesses shed workers: Integrated Forest Products in the ACT shed 110 workers; Telstra shed 111 workers in December; Commander, a communications company, shed 600 workers; Mitsubishi shed 930 workers; National Parts shed 300 workers; Telstra in Launceston shed 100 workers; Western Exporters in Charleville shed 90 workers; Brintons in Geelong shed 100 workers; Fisher and Paykel in Brisbane shed 310 workers; Players Biscuits in New South Wales shed 200 workers; Riviera Marine in the member for Fadden’s electorate shed 136 workers; Octavia shed 100 workers in February and 20 in May; Qantas and Jetstar are shedding jobs in Cairns; Holden in Victoria is shedding 531 workers; Clipsal is shedding 200 workers; and Crane is shedding 90 workers.

That is the record of the Labor government in six short months. They have already seen the turning point of the economy. In the leading indexes we now see a turning point in the economy. In the month of May they lost almost 20,000 jobs. At the end of May there were 20,000 fewer jobs than there were at the start of May, and there is more to come. Your plan is to take 134,000 workers out of the Australian economy. Your plan is to have 134,000 fewer working families in 12 months time than what you have now. It is a disgrace. You have let down the people who voted for you.

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Procurement) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The subject of this MPI is the issue of job security—and what a silly position the member for Moncrieff has put forward. The members opposite have contributed to the greatest attack on the job security of working people in this country in the history of Federation. That is what you have done while in government. For the 12 years of the Howard government, you presided over the greatest attack on job security in this country’s history. How did you do it? With Work Choices. Job security in this economy is served by two things—

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Small Business, the Service Economy and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Having a job.

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Procurement) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

having a job—that is right—and attending to macroeconomic policy in a responsible way. My colleague the Minister for Small Business, Independent Contractors and the Service Economy indicated exactly how you failed on a range of issues in a macroeconomic sense. The second most important thing for working people and their job security is the safety net and being protected from unfair dismissal. You brought in Work Choices. What did Work Choices involve?

Andrew Southcott (Boothby, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment Participation and Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is tired.

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Procurement) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is not tired; it is the greatest piece of theatre of the ridiculous. It is absurd to see you come in here and pretend that you are concerned about job security. Consider the key elements of Work Choices, from which you have not yet learnt a lesson. The first is to abolish unfair dismissal protection. What is it that serves the job security of Australian people in the most significant way? It is being protected from indiscriminate and unfair dismissal in their employment.

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Small Business, the Service Economy and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Ciobo interjecting

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Moncrieff has had his turn.

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Procurement) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You brought in a system that exposed 3.7 million people; all employees of businesses with fewer than 100 employees had their unfair dismissal protection removed. What was the result? People lost their job security. That system did not create jobs; it exposed people to indiscriminate and unfair treatment by their employers. If you have not learnt that, you have not learnt much from the last election. The strength of the rejection by the Australian community of your attack on their job security was what led to your defeat in the election. And that is only one element of your Work Choices legislation from which you have learnt no lessons. You put the safety net up for grabs at the bargaining table, and those in the most vulnerable positions were exposed to having their employment conditions removed and their jobs casualised. If you understood what job security was for Australian working people—

Andrew Southcott (Boothby, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment Participation and Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker, I raise a point of order. I may have offended in this respect myself, but I think the speaker should address his remarks through the chair.

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Everybody has offended that rule during this debate and I have not picked up on it. The parliamentary secretary has the call and the member for Boothby will try to listen to him in silence.

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Procurement) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I support that, Madam Deputy Speaker. You put the safety net up for grabs and, with AWAs—

Andrew Southcott (Boothby, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment Participation and Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker, I do not think that ‘you’ put the safety net up for grabs; I do not think we did either, but—

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The parliamentary secretary will not use the word ‘you’.

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Procurement) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Boothby and the member for Moncrieff and their colleagues, in their role in the Howard government, put the safety net up for grabs, and people do not forget it. In addition, you brought in AWAs and, through that mechanism, people’s job security was undermined—their employment conditions were removed and their pay was cut.

Again, if you were concerned about people’s job security, you would immediately repudiate those policies. It is not enough to say that you do not believe in AWAs anymore; you should be saying that you believe in unfair dismissal protection. The members opposite should make clear their support for the protection of people’s job security by supporting the Rudd Labor government’s position on changes to the industrial relations system, which will deliver job security by protecting from unfair dismissal and eliminating individual contracts and AWAs, which undermine job security and take away working conditions.

There are other elements of the Work Choices legislation that members opposite should also reflect on. That legislation undermined the right of people to organise and to be represented by a union. Both of those things serve job security well in the Australian workforce and have done so for a long time. You also destroyed the role of the independent umpire in the industrial relations system. The independent umpire has assisted by mediating where any irresponsible party has unfairly attacked people’s job security over many decades—and you took that independent umpire away. And you sit there and possibly wonder about it; you react with mirth to criticism of the policies of the previous Howard government, which destroyed people’s job security. You cannot create jobs by destroying people’s job security.

The members opposite do not understand that responsible economic management and the protection of job security through a decent safety net are not incompatible. They are both compatible elements of a decent approach to the regulation of the labour market in this country. The members opposite failed on macroeconomic policy, on the protection of the safety net and in relation to the protection of people’s job security against unfair dismissal. You have failed on so many fronts that you have been rejected by the Australian community. Learn a lesson from it. Support the Rudd Labor government’s approach to protecting people’s job security.

Fran Bailey (McEwen, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the couple of minutes that are left, let me also join in this matter of public importance debate on job security. The reality is that it is the millions of Australian small businesses who employ 3.8 million Australians that understand what this government has done to them and their employees. They gave an indication of it the day before the federal election, when the Sensis survey came out; they said that they were worried about a potential change of government. The Sensis survey in February, the latest one, shows that small business, the major employer in this country, has no faith in this government’s policies. Look at what this government has already done to small business. The now Minister for Small Business, Independent Contractors and the Service Economy, who is sitting there, 12 months ago would visit regional areas of Australia in particular and extol the virtues of the Small Business Field Officer system, and now he has scrapped it.