Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move amendments (2) to (4), as circulated in my name, together:

(2) Schedule 2, item 1, page 5 (line 7), omit "or 140GBC".

(3) Schedule 2, item 1, page 5 (lines 12 to 15), omit "Section 140GBC provides for exemptions from the labour market testing condition to apply in relation to the required skill level and occupation for a nominated position.".

(4) Schedule 2, item 2, page 8 (line 22) to page 9 (line 28), omit section 140GBC.

The purpose of these amendments is to extend the labour market testing exception for all skilled workers, doctors and anyone with a degree. I do not wish to take up the time of the House extensively on these issues and will not repeat what I have said in a number of speeches in this place.

I live in my home town of Charters Towers—I feel very embarrassed with the great congratulations going on with the member for New England. Most certainly it is the passing of an era. But my home town is a good example; we have lost 1,500 jobs with the closure of mines there. We were looking forward to having numerous jobs in the Galilee Basin coalfields, but the operators there are continuously asserting that they will man these mines with fly-ins from overseas. Even if they are not saying it, that is the way I think it will end up. Those 1,500 people have been left with homes they cannot sell, because prices for homes are down in Charters Towers. They cannot get jobs or starts anywhere. Companies operating out west say you have to go and live in Townsville. In Townsville, again, many people come loose from the Army every year. They are desperate to get starts in the mines and, once again, they cannot get starts in the mines. The copper stream in Mount Isa is arguably partly closing—maybe even totally closing—so the people of Mount Isa and Cloncurry, my homeland, are also desperately short of jobs. We do not want to see these jobs taken by overseas people. We believe that bringing them in will undermine our pay and conditions in Australia and we simply will not have the jobs to go to.

Nearly 200,000 migrants come into Australia a year, and some 1.3 million or 1.4 million people are seeking full-time employment. There is an inadequate pool there that can provide jobs that will enable us to go on as we have in the last hundred years in Australia: providing our own workforce in these areas. If people say to us, 'We brought large numbers from overseas,' that is not true compared with what we are doing now. People from Australia could get starts in the mines. I got my first start there. There were a lot of what we then called New Australians working in the mines. There were an awful lot of First Australians working in the mines as well. For a lot of my First Australian brothers, in a very real sense they will not be able to get the golden opportunities that were available to us when I was a young person, because the new jobs are being taken by these contractors.

I think there are four steel fabricators in Cloncurry, my home town, and one does a lot of fly-in. They have all lost their contracts at Cloncurry, and those positions have been taken by one company employing section 457 workers. So I am not talking about something that is unreal to me; I am talking about an issue that is immediate and real. Again I praise Andrew Forrest in Western Australia, who has trained up nearly 2,000 First Australians over the last 10 or 15 years; 400 or 500 are still employed in his mines as we talk, and many have gone off to jobs elsewhere, but they had a start in life which he afforded them. If you say we cannot get people, there would be at least 40,000 or 50,000 people of First Australian descent across the top of Australia who would give their eye teeth to get a start and have a job in the mines. So I commend the amendments to the House. I have broken them into two. The first one is to extend labour market testing exception for all skilled workers. I move that amendment first.

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Speaker, I do not want to take up the House's time but I seek clarity. My understanding is that, despite what the member for Kennedy has said, the amendments he has moved and was speaking to are (2) to (4), which are about no labour market testing, and that separately after this we will have a division on (1) and (5), which is the cap and disclosure.

Ms Anna Burke (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is my understanding of how we have set out the procedure. We are dealing with amendments (2) to (4) and after we have done that we will go on to the next amendments, (1) and (5). So the amendments on no labour market testing are the first to be moved.

Mr Katter interjecting—

I thank the member for Kennedy. I hope that clarifies it for the member for Melbourne. The question is that the amendments be agreed to.

Mr Katter interjecting—

You do not need to apologise for the processes of the parliament. Nobody needs to apologise for the processes of the parliament.

A division having been called and the bells having been rung—

As there are fewer than five members on the side for the ayes in this division, I declare the question negatived in accordance with standing order 127. The names of those members who are in the minority will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings.

Question negatived, Mr Katter, Mr Wilkie and Mr Bandt voting aye.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move amendments (1) to (5), as circulated in my name, together:

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 4), after "Schedules", insert "2A,".

(2) Schedule 2, item 1, page 5 (line 7), omit "or 140GBC".

(3) Schedule 2, item 1, page 5 (lines 12 to 15), omit "Section 140GBC provides for exemptions from the labour market testing condition to apply in relation to the required skill level and occupation for a nominated position.".

(4) Schedule 2, item 2, page 8 (line 22) to page 9 (line 28), omit section 140GBC.

(5) Page 12 (after line 12), after Schedule 3, insert:

Schedule 2A—Cap and disclosure for Subclass 457 visas

Migration Act 1958

1 At the end of section 38

  Add:

(3) In relation to Subclass 457 visas, the regulations are taken to have prescribed as a criterion that the grant of the visa would not cause the number of Subclass 457 visas granted in a particular financial year to exceed 6,000. For the purposes of subsection (2), this is taken to be a criterion allowed by subsection (1) of this section.

(4) In subsection (3):

  Subclass 457 visa means a visa referred to in the regulations as a Subclass 457 (Business (Long Stay)) visa or a Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)) visa.

2 After section 140ZI

  Insert:

140ZIA Register of approved sponsors of 457 visas

(1) The Minister must maintain a register, to be known as the Register of Approved Sponsors of 457 Visas, in which the Minister includes the following particulars:

  (a) the identity of each approved sponsor who is sponsoring the holder of a Subclass 457 visa;

  (b) the number of holders of Subclass 457 visas being sponsored by that approved sponsor;

(c) a description of each position occupied by the holders of the Subclass 457 visas.

(2) The Register may be maintained by electronic means.

(3) The Register must be made available for inspection on the internet.

(4) The Register is not a legislative instrument.

(5) In this section:

  Subclass 457 visa means a visa referred to in the regulations as a Subclass 457 (Business (Long Stay)) visa or a Subclass 457 (Temporary Work (Skilled)) visa.

I do not wish to take up the time of the House again on this issue. I reiterate the irony of the ALP attacking the Liberal Party, who are only bringing 38,000 457 workers into the country. I reiterate the figures: almost 200,000 migrants a year are now coming into the country. There are a number of categories under which people can get workers. Why, over the last five years, do we suddenly have to bring 100,000 workers into Australia? There has been no burgeoning of unemployment. In fact, 16,000 people have been put off from manufacturing in the last 12 months alone and almost that number from the agricultural and tourism sectors as well. There is a huge work pool there that can be drawn upon. We do not need to go down this pathway.

In addressing the specific amendments here, we have asked that the 457 workers be capped at 6,000. I do not wish to embarrass Minister Burke, but he venomously attacked the Liberal Party when they were bringing in 15,000 a year. He and his government have been notoriously silent, when they are bringing in 125,000 a year, not 15,000 a year.

This thing is not a rort, insofar as you will not find people acting criminally in this regard. As far as I am concerned, the system is the rort. You now have complete control of your worker. He has no rights because you as the employer are holding the deportation order in your hand. Quite frankly, there are myriad arrangements by which you can bypass the award system. You cannot do that with an Australian worker because, somewhere down the track, he is going to blow the whistle. But a 457 worker aint ever going to blow the whistle because, when he blows the whistle, the whistle will be shoved down his gullet and he will be sent back overseas with the deportation order.

Ms Anna Burke (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that amendments (1) to (5) moved by the member for Kennedy be agreed to.

Question negatived.

The noes have it. As there were not two voices on the ayes, no division can be called.

Debate adjourned.