Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the member for Gorton from moving the following motion forthwith:

That this House condemns the Abbott Government for its failure to protect Australian jobs in the automotive and manufacturing industry.

This is indeed a very, very sad day for Australia. An iconic company that has had a remarkable history does not look like it has much of a future, and we have to ask ourselves: why is it that this great company, Holden, sees itself in such a difficult situation? Well, you need not go any further than to look at the conduct and behaviour of those opposite in terms of not engaging with this company and looking after the 1,300 workers in Victoria and the 1,600 workers and their families in South Australia.

Yesterday, we had the remarkable situation where the Treasurer of this country threatened the company and dared them to leave Australia. I quote from this newspaper: 'Hockey dares GM to leave'.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

All those waving newspapers are out of order—

Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And guess what? The Treasurer got his wish!

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

and should they be seen again the members will be asked to remove.

Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Treasurer got his wish, because, unfortunately and tragically, as a result of the lack of engagement, the lack of regard—

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Speaker, on a point of order: if the member for Gorton seeks leave to move the motion, leave will be granted and the Manager of Opposition Business and I have agreed that if he pursues that course there will be two speakers per side from the government and the opposition.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the member for Gorton prepared to move that way?

Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am happy to do that, Madam Speaker, and—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In that case—

Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am happy to move the motion—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

the member for Gorton has the call to move his motion—

Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

but he does not have the call to flash any newspapers, and if he does he will be asked to remove himself from the chamber.

Question agreed to.

Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House condemns the Abbott government for its failure to protect Australian jobs in the automotive and manufacturing sectors.

This motion needs to be debated in this House, because today we have seen a very difficult and terrible decision for 3,000 workers in this country. But it is not just those 3,000 workers. As a result of the decision by Holden today we will see a multiplier effect on job losses throughout the automotive sector and other sectors of our economy.

What we have also seen, not only today but as a result of the inaction by the government this week, is a government that is not interested in ensuring that an iconic company like Holden stays in this country. That is an absolute shame.

Yesterday in this place we saw the Treasurer stand up and effectively goad General Motors-Holden into leaving Australia. He effectively said that if you do not make a decision you might as well get out. That was the impact and the import of what he said yesterday in this place. Unfortunately for that company and the workers and their families the Treasurer has had his way.

Also, before the decision that was taken today, and even well before the comments made by the Treasurer yesterday, we have seen a fight going on within the government about how they can stop taxpayers' money from in any way providing support for this important sector of our economy. Instead of them using their energy and their industry to support these workers and the company, we have seen them fighting each other to see if they can drag this company out of Australia. They should hold their heads in collective shame over their inability to look after Holden.

As a result, almost 3,000 workers in this country go to Christmas with great uncertainty. There is nothing worse for a family than not having secure employment. There is nothing worse, particularly at this time of the year, than not having any sense of security about income for your household—having sufficient money to pay for food, rent and the mortgage and to look after your kids. These are the real issues that are being discussed around kitchen tables all over the country.

Instead, we have this ideological battle within the government about whether taxpayers' money should be used in any way to support this industry. We should have seen this coming, because before the election they made it very clear that they were going to rip a half a billion dollars out of the automotive sector. That was the first thing we saw. The second thing we saw was the Treasurer's own comments—he was obviously very weak on GrainCorp, but wanted to toughen up when it came to this issue. So, what does he do? He says: 'Enough is enough. We do not have to put any extra dollars in.'

Let us look at the facts here. Of course we should be very careful with taxpayers' money. But let us look at the economic effects of investment. This company directly and indirectly employs a quarter of a million Australians. That is the first thing. The second thing is that at the very least there is about a nine-fold return for every dollar invested by taxpayers. In the case of this company it could be argued that it is up to 18 times higher, as a result. So this is not just providing support for support's sake; it is ensuring that we provide sufficient support for the company. Unfortunately the government has abjectly failed in that regard. Time and time again we have had ministers on the other side making it clear they want to see an end to that support.

What are we to say to those workers, and indeed other workers in other companies, who will want to see their federal government provide support for them in times of trouble? We would all recall that for the last four years we had the now Prime Minister, the then Leader of the Opposition, going around the country, visiting ever workplace that would have him, talking about his concern for Australian workers.

Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In a hi-vis vest.

Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As the member for Hunter said, he was in a hi-vis vest. He was wearing a hard hat and protective glasses. He had Australian blue-collar workers standing behind him and he said that he was going to be a Prime Minister who concerned himself with those people. He used those workers as a prop for his media conferences. You have to think a bit more about Australian workers than just use them as a backdrop for your political gains. Australian workers expect their government to act in the national interest and look after their back—to look after them when they are in a bit of trouble.

What have we seen in that time? We have seen the inability of this government to engage with the sector. We have had threats by the Treasurer and we have had a Prime Minister who on the one hand said he was going to have a calm and methodical government but then he refers this issue to the Productivity Commission and, before the Productivity Commission can even start, the Prime Minister says that there will be no more money for this industry. What sort of message does it send to Holden and the automotive sector when the Prime Minister had already made his decision and pre-empted the outcome of an inquiry by the Productivity Commission? It says that this is just a sham. It says that we are referring this to the Productivity Commission as an alibi for doing nothing and not really caring about these workers. Today, unfortunately and most tragically, we see the news that thousands of workers will lose their jobs, and that is a dreadful thing.

On top of that we have already seen the problems that confront Qantas. We would hope the government starts to engage more fully with that company.

Just think about how important the automotive sector is to this country. We want to be a country that builds things. We want to make sure that we have a manufacturing sector. We are one of only 13 countries that have the capacity to design and manufacture a motor vehicle. We are an open and competitive market but we also ensure that we provide the right support. And we are no different from other countries. The United States and other countries provide support for their auto workers. They look after them because they know it is a tough industry. They helped them restructure. They helped them innovate. What we have seen here instead is, firstly, a reduction of $500 million in support from the government. Since then, every message sent by this government has been, 'We are no longer going to support those workers.' That is the problem here: this government has turned its back on Australian workers.

The reason that I sought to move a suspension of standing orders in this place was that you would have thought that on a day that this announcement was made the Acting Prime Minister would have gotten up on his feet and announced it to the parliament and talked to the Australian people via this chamber. In fact, it took a question.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would remind the member that he is moving the motion to suspend standing orders and should be speaking to that motion.

Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Speaker, this goes to the genuineness of support that the government has shown towards these workers. It took a question from the Labor opposition to raise this matter in this place, even though the Acting Prime Minister was well aware of the facts when he entered the chamber in the first place. What sort of government is this when the Acting Prime Minister does not even stand up and make this issue the biggest matter in this place?

By way of contrast, even Premier Napthine understood the importance of standing up in the chamber and announcing the consequences of that dreadful and awful decision. But we saw none of that from the government. The first time that they got up to answer a question on this from their own side was at 2.30. That was the Treasurer in response to a question. Prior to that we had questions coming in from the backbench that had nothing to do with the automotive industry and nothing to do with Holden. That pretty much underlines the insincerity that this government has when it comes to these people.

Government members interjecting—

They can keep shouting all they like. They sound overly defensive. The reason they sound defensive is that they have something to defend, and that is a dreadful reputation with a dreadful disregard for Australian workers. Remember: they are the party of Work Choices. We should not forget that.

Government members interjecting—

Yes, it is all a bit of a joke; Work Choices is all a bit of a joke. But the fact is that whenever it comes to workers they are always put last by this government. Why should the lack of regard that this government shows when it comes to the needs of working people in this country surprise me or other members on this side of the House?

This government needs to start to engage and look after companies in this country. It should continue to look at better ways to provide support for innovative sectors of our economy. It needs to start to engage not just with the automotive sector but with the aviation sector and other sectors of our economy instead of obsessing and fighting with itself about whether taxpayers should provide any support whatsoever. As a result of the lack of regard and investment by this government and the fact it has have been divided on this issue ever since it was elected, it has fallen asleep on its watch. It has only been three months—it is hard to believe—but it has failed to respond.

Today, the Australian automotive industry is in crisis. Around 250,000 Australians employed either directly or indirectly by that sector face a sleepless night. Australia's car industry and the workers and business dependent on it deserve more than a death by dithering. But that is at best what we have had from this government. Mr Devereux, on behalf of Holden, was not clear on the government's position. At best, he was hoping that it was making up its mind and might provide some support. But all hope was lost when we heard the Treasurer yesterday make very clear that he wanted to see the end of Holden in this country. Unfortunately, the arm wrestle between the Minister for Industry and the Treasurer was won by the Treasurer. As a result, workers in that company and other workers in similar companies will be facing a very uncertain Christmas. That is a very unfortunate thing.

Mr Pyne interjecting—

You can interject all you like, member for Sturt. Here is a bloke from South Australia who has so little regard for Holden workers that he thinks it is funny. It is not funny and the member for Sturt should not think it is funny. What is this photo about?

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Gorton will put that photo down.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on a point of order, Madam Speaker. The member for Gorton has routinely throughout his speech tried to mislead people about the attitudes of the Acting Prime Minister and now me. The idea that I would find that the—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the House will resume his seat.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am asking him to withdraw the statement that I find this funny, because I do not find it funny at all.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the House will resume his seat. This is a debate. There will be the opportunity to refute those statements made by the member for Gorton in the course of the debate.

Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will finish where I started. This is a very sad day for Australia. It is such an iconic company that has employed Australians over many decades. It is a company that most Australians grew up with. Instead of finding a way to ensure its future, it is fair to say that the government has been derelict by failing to support the company when support was needed. That is why this motion needed to be debated today. That is why the opposition has brought this matter on. When it comes to looking after industry and indeed workers in this country you will always find Labor standing up for them, defending their interests and ensuring that we find the best way possible to provide support for those industries. That is the exact opposite to we have seen. But that should not be surprising: everything this government said in opposition has turned out to be the complete opposite to what it has done when elected.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I call the honourable the Treasurer.

Opposition members interjecting—

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Enough of the confected anger from the other side, thanks.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! If I see that copy of the Financial Review held up again, whoever holds it up is out under 94(a).

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let's deal with some of the facts. If the Labor Party thinks that something that was said in this House yesterday caused General Motors to suddenly decide, after being here for decades, that they should leave the country, then that just illustrates how poorly informed the Labor Party is about how enterprise works. These decisions are made over a matter of months, if not years—and it was a very significant decision for General Motors. And it was no secret. It was in the Wall Street Journal. It was well known to people that General Motors Holden were contemplating leaving Australia.

The confected anger from Labor is appalling, because it treats the Australian people and stakeholders and workers with total contempt. In their statement in Detroit the Chief Executive of General Motors Holden said emphatically:

The decision to end manufacturing in Australia reflects the perfect storm of negative influences the automotive industry faces in the country, including the sustained strength of the Australian dollar, high cost of production, small domestic market and arguably the most competitive and fragmented auto market in the world.

The hypocrisy of the Labor Party knows no bounds. This morning they were railing against the high Australian dollar and in the meantime they invite Paul Keating to come and address the caucus about how good it was to float the Australian dollar!

Michael Danby (Melbourne Ports, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It was right!

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's right: it was right to float the Australian dollar, and General Motors Holden identified it as one of the reasons why they are leaving Australia—the high Australian dollar. So please spare us the hypocrisy—

Mr Danby interjecting—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Melbourne Ports!

Mr Stephen Jones interjecting—

Mr Clare interjecting—

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Are you going to throw them out?

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Melbourne Ports, the member for Throsby and the member for Blaxland are all warned.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They are warned? But there was a general warning. Australia's share of world car production has decreased from 0.8 per cent of cars in 2000 to 0.32 per cent of cars in 2011. That is our share of world car production. So it has virtually halved.

In contrast, during that period, from the beginning of this century, in Asian economies and the Middle East car production has increased from six per cent of world production to 36 per cent of world production. So global manufacturers have moved to places of production where it is cheaper to produce a motor vehicle. That was best evidenced by Toyota's submission to the Productivity Commission inquiry, which states that by 2018 it 'needs to reduce the cost of producing each vehicle in Australia by $3,800'. Holden has said 'it costs $3,750 per vehicle more to build cars in Australia relative to other countries such as Thailand'. And of that $3,750, $2,000 is within Holden's own plants—and it mainly relates to the cost of labour. Another $1,500 is associated with their buy-local program and the final $250 is the cost of logistics for imported components.

The high cost of production in Australia is no secret. Everyone knows it has been the case; it has been regularly stated by the manufacturers themselves. As it is no secret that the costs of production were proving so prohibitive—

Mr Zappia interjecting—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Makin will desist!

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The costs of production in Australia have inhibited our ability to compete on the world stage, therefore we must do everything we possibly can to try and reduce our costs of production without reducing the real wages of workers.

So I say emphatically again in this place, as I did yesterday, to the workers at Toyota: please on Friday vote to support Toyota being in Australia. Please do that. Please do not listen to the AMWU, which is urging you to vote against a change in the work conditions at Toyota. If there is any lesson that must be learnt it is that you cannot push against the tide; you must work with the flow to get maximum benefit for Australian workers. That is what you have to do.

Now we have the union saying that Toyota, which exports 70 per cent of its production to the Middle East, should close for 21 days over Christmas—when the Middle East needs that constant supply of Toyota motor vehicles. And it is not as if Toyota is saying, 'No Christmas'—it is coming back and saying, 'We just want to close the plant for 10 days, please, so that we can be a consistent supplier to the Middle East.'

What about this clause in the agreement between Toyota and its workers: currently, union representatives are entitled to 10 days paid education leave per year for the purpose of union sponsored training. Union reps get 10 days pay for 10 days of sponsored training, and the union representatives are able to pool their collective days. So some senior union reps can take months off work and be paid by Toyota. Toyota is legitimately saying, 'We want to be able to allow our union representatives to take days off for union training, but let's get the balance right.' How do you explain in Tokyo that workers are entitled to have four hours paid leave for the purpose of donating blood? Really, this is the sort of stuff that sends the worst message overseas.

And Detroit as a capital city has just gone bankrupt. General Motors has just lost billions of dollars. The American government has just lost nearly $10 billion on its investment in General Motors. General Motors is closing plants right around the world. And in Australia the costs of production per vehicle are $3,750 higher than anywhere else. And why is it a surprise?

Michael Danby (Melbourne Ports, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why are they exporting?

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They are not exporting; that is the problem. You don't get it. The export market has fallen apart for General Motors-Holden in Australia.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Melbourne Ports is not in his seat. He is interjecting and will remove himself under 94(a).

The member for Melbourne Ports then left the chamber.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Labor Party just does not get it. And as if there was not any warning from General Motors executives, from Toyota executives: the OECD, in a report compiled in 2012, said emphatically that all the reasons General Motors identified today were the reasons that in 2012 the government at the time should have worked with the motor vehicle industry on the transition arrangements. This is not a surprise to Labor. They were warned by the OECD in 2012. The chief of staff of the former Treasurer, the member for Lilley, was at the OECD as a Treasury representative at the time. And the warning was clear: if you do not deal with these transitional issues there will not be a future for motor vehicle manufacturing in Australia.

Of course we are upset about this; of course we are. We hate the fact that Australians are losing jobs. And we want to do absolutely everything we can to stop that. We were the ones who said that you cannot put a new $1.8 billion tax on the motor vehicle industry. We were the ones who said that the best way to help manufacturing in Australia is to get rid of the carbon tax. We were the ones who said that if you want to stimulate other industries, like the mining industry, the worst thing you can do is impose a mining tax. And we were the ones who said that you have to get rid of the regulation, you have to get rid of the red tape, you have to lower your costs of production in order to compete with the rest of the world. But the Labor Party do not get it. They have never run a business. Most of them have never worked in a business. It is all pure politics from Labor. And the losers out of that are the workers, because the Labor Party are more concerned about a political headline than they are about the worth of everyday workers.

We are going to do everything we can for the workers, not just at General Motors-Holden but also at Toyota—all the component manufacturers' workers—and also for the taxpayers of Australia. Ultimately what it comes down to is that prosperity comes only from hard work and enterprise; it does not come from the benevolence of taxpayers.

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In 1947 Joseph Benedict Chifley went to watch the first Holden leave the line at Fishermans Bend. And the great question before this House is whether this Treasurer, Joseph Benedict Hockey, the member for North Sydney, is going to go and watch the last Holden leave the line, in my electorate. This is a Treasurer with an iconic brand and 50,000 jobs hanging around his neck. Make no mistake about it. We all know the headline, even though we have been banned from showing it to anybody: 'Hockey dares GM to leave'. There he was in this House: belligerence, shouting, bravado. And all the same things we saw in this parliament were no doubt seen in the cabinet room, because we all know that this came down to a fight between the member for North Sydney and the member for Groom. That is what this was all about.

I remember on 3 October seeing the ABC headlines, after we had toured the factory. The member for Hindmarsh toured the factory with us. He came down with the industry minister, and we toured the factory—Senator Xenophon, all the Liberal senators, Senator Sean Edwards and others. It was a big tour around Holden, with pictures of the industry minister standing there proudly, using workers as props. And then he went and said, 'Just have patience'. In fact, I have the headline here: 'New Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane tours Holden plant and seeks patience from Detroit over federal assistance'. That was the headline on ABC—'seeks patience'. What they were trying to get was silence—silence from the Labor Party, silence from Senator Xenophon, silence from South Australia, silence from the unions, silence from the company. They were buying time to have an argument in cabinet. And it did not come down to these other factors; it came down to whether or not the Treasurer, with all his bravado and arrogance, prevailed over the member for Groom. That is why we had silence for so long—deathly silence, right up until the point that there was a leak.

And what was the leak about? It was about shifting blame onto a company that has been trying its level best and whose workforce has been trying its level best. Those opposite talk about labour costs and flexibility. What other workforce in this country, during the global financial crisis, worked one week with pay and one week without? It was only at GMH. And when they were asked to give up hard-won entitlements to secure production, when they were asked for $15 million in costs, what did the workforce do? They voted to agree with the company, setting up the framework for future investment. What they needed to remain in Australia was government assistance—the same government assistance that car workers get in Germany, in Japan, in Korea and in any other country that supports its car workers. But in Australia they found a government that was indifferent to the economic circumstances of the world and indifferent to jobs in this country. Let's make no mistake: this was all about the division in the government; this was all about the heart and soul of this government. And what we find is that a callous, flint-hearted Treasurer has won the day. If there is unemployment in this country, and if there is a tragic human cost to this decision in this country, it will be on the head of the Treasurer, it will be on the head of the member for Hindmarsh, it will be on the head of Senator Edwards and all of the other Liberals who sat quietly for two months, lulling the whole place into silence, and then, at five minutes to midnight, leapt on this iconic national brand.

For 50-odd years governments have been supporting car manufacturing in this country. That is why we had Minister Hodgett from the Victorian government say yesterday: 'My message to federal colleagues is any speculation on future of Holden is not helpful. It's disappointing.' What response did he get? The Treasurer, and the Acting Prime Minister goaded this company into making a decision before Christmas—of all times! The Acting Prime Minister sent a letter. Who sends letters these days? Couldn't he pick up the phone? Couldn't he go down and have a meeting? Federal industry policy has descended to a one-page excuse. That is what federal industry policy has become.

There are workers in my electorate—and I was with them last week—such as Murray Akehurst who, in the Advertiser on 2 December, was talking about how he wanted to fight for his job. He has been there for 16 years. He is 50 years old. Where is he going to get a job? Damien Griffiths of Andrews Farm is a father of two children. He has a mortgage. Where will he get a job? The human cost will still be there in 2017. Make no mistake, it will be there in no uncertain terms. All that this government has given the workers of Holden is the certainty of unemployment. That is what they have given them. What we have is a Treasurer who has forsaken that title. Have no doubt about it, he will not have the courage to go down there to Elizabeth and watch the last car rolled off the line. He will not have the courage to go down there and face those workers. None of you will. When component workers came up to this House, with whom did they get a meeting? They got a meeting with the industry minister, who is a good man who is trying his best, I am sure. But they could not get a meeting with the Treasurer. You can be sure that what we have is a government that is completely indifferent to these workers.

I know we are not allowed to hold up headlines, but we should remember this other headline from today: 'PM's pansies'.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member is defying the chair. He will remove himself at once under standing order 94(a).

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You name me! I will take the loss of a day's pay in solidarity with the workers at Holden.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member will not defy the chair. He will remove himself forthwith under standing order 94(a). Remove yourself.

Honourable members interjecting—

The member has behaved deplorably. He will remove himself at once from the chamber, under standing order 94(a).

The member for Wakefield then left the chamber.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the motion moved by the member for Gorton that this House condemns the Abbott government for its failure to protect Australian jobs in the automotive and manufacturing sector. I move an amendment to that motion:

That all words after 'that' be omitted and the following words substituted:

That this parliament pledges to work together to protect and support manufacturing and employment in Australia through policies that promote growth, particularly taxation and regulatory policies.

This issue is far too important for the political game-playing that we are seeing from our Labor colleagues in the chamber today. The people in South Australia and Victoria and the Holden workers in both Melbourne and Adelaide are not really interested in the political game-playing by the opposition on this issue today. They are sitting in their homes and workplaces thinking that by 2017 at the latest they will have had to find new careers and new jobs to feed their families.

The amendment that I move to the motion moved today by the member for Gorton reflects the fact that this parliament should rise above the petty point-scoring that we are seeing from the opposition on this issue, because there are hundreds of thousands of people in the manufacturing sector around Australia, not just the car workers. There are hundreds of thousands of families, workers, small-business people, whether it is in the component industry or other manufacturing, that are all affected by exactly the same issues that have impacted on Holden in their announcement today. Nobody seriously believes—do they?—that Holden is the only company in Australia that is affected by the high Australian dollar, high production costs, high real wages. That is what was reflected in the press statement that General Motors made from Detroit. They did not seek to blame the federal government, the state government or anybody else for what has happened to Holden. They very pointedly, clearly and factually set out why this commercial business decision was made in Detroit, probably in the last few months but communicated today. They said in the statement:

The decision to end manufacturing in Australia reflects the perfect storm of negative influences the automotive industry faces in the country, including the sustained strength of the Australian dollar, high cost of production, small domestic market and arguably the most competitive and fragmented auto market in the world.

General Motors themselves made it perfectly plain.

The opposition are still playing the games. It is pathetic.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker, as to whether the amendment moved by the Leader of the House is in order, because it contradicts the original motion that is before the House.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The amendment is in order.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As a South Australian—and I am not the only South Australian in the House—I understand how important the car industry has been. For years, people like me, the member for Hindmarsh, the member for Boothby and senators from South Australia have campaigned and argued for the car industry. Money from the taxpayer is not the reason General Motors-Holden have made this decision today. There has been $1 billion to 2015 from the Australian taxpayer—$1 billion of taxpayers' funds—to support the car industry to—

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. It goes to your ruling. The motion is about 'automotive'. The amendment moved does not mention 'automotive' or the car industry—not once. Not once does it mention it, and therefore—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member will resume his seat. The standing orders permit such an amendment to be moved.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Of course, manufacturing is the car industry so it is a relevant amendment to the original motion. Beyond 2015, $1 billion sits on the table for the car industry. So taxpayers' money is not the problem. If taxpayers' money was the problem, why would it be that, six months after previous Prime Minister Ms Gillard announced a $275 million package for the car industry, in March 2012—and heralded it by saying 'through the announcement that we've made together today we know Holden will be here through to 2022'—Holden announced that they were reducing their workforce by eight per cent? That was in spite of the fact that the Premier of South Australia, Mr Weatherill, said, 'What we're guaranteeing is no jobs decline.' He said that in the paper on 24 March 2012, and then, six months later, Holden reduced their workforce by eight per cent.

All fair-minded people in this place and in the community know that there has been a tremendous amount of taxpayers' money put into the car industry over decades, not just since the Howard government's automotive plan. General Motors have made it absolutely clear today that the reasons they are closing the operations have nothing to do with the decisions the federal government made. Labor can spin their wheels and try their best to pretend to the Holden workers that this has something to do with the federal government. They will find it very hard to explain how, if it is our fault, Holden is closing its operations. It was not their fault that Ford closed their operations, that Mitsubishi closed their operations, or that the Olympic Dam expansion is not going ahead. They will find it very hard to explain why they thought support for the car industry was to make fringe benefits tax changes that hit the car industry with $1.8 billion of extra tax. They will find it very hard to explain to the people of my great state how a carbon tax that added to the cost of building a car did not have any impact on the car industry. It did not have any impact, apparently, on the car industry!

Their hypocrisy is writ large in this debate. The sanctimony coming from the Labor Party is gut-wrenching. This goes beyond politics. I see the member for Kennedy here. He has been arguing for years for policies for the car industry, and other industries that we probably do not support. But at least he has been genuine from the beginning. I did not hear these howls of outrage and condemnation for their own government when Ford and Mitsubishi announced that they were closing. I do not remember the South Australian members of parliament standing up here and criticising the previous government when BHP said that sovereign risk, uncertain government policy, extra taxes and the demands of the union movement were the reasons that the Olympic Dam expansion was not going ahead. The public are not stupid. The public know full well what has been going on in manufacturing in Australia. It is in the statement made by General Motors-Holden.

I ask the question, as a South Australian: what has my state government done in the last 12 years to diversify our state's economy? Why hasn't it been putting resources into agriculture, education services, construction or the mining industry? Why didn’t it diversify our economy rather than relying on more and more taxpayers' dollars to keep a car industry here—an industry that said today that taxpayer dollars were not the reason they were staying in the first place and taxpayer dollars would not keep them here?

Even if the Abbott government had announced another half a billion dollars for the car industry on top of the $1 billion that is already on the table, would it have kept the car industry here? It is very unlikely that it would have, because the decisions about this were made in Detroit. It was Detroit's decision not to allow Holden to export. There was a time a few years ago when Holden was exporting to the United States, when, in California, if you got into a police car—hopefully not!—or saw a police car, it was made by Holden at Elizabeth. They were exporting to the Middle East, one of their biggest export destinations. Then Detroit made the decision that Holden should not compete with their own operations in America by exporting to the United States and the Middle East. It was Detroit's decision not to reinvest in equipment for Holden at Elizabeth, to make the plant more and more competitive.

The reason the House is basically quiet is that everybody knows this is true. All the political point-scoring in the world, all the outrage in the world, will not change the fact that what I am stating is known facts. I mourn what Holden has announced today, but unfortunately we have to work together to make it better for the future.

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

I wrote a small history book.

Honourable Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

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

This is serious stuff. I do not think this is really the time for laughing and humour. You cannot write a history of Australia without putting in that history the story of Holden. It is one of the great achievements of the Australian people—the story of the Holden family and Laurence Hartnett. We are watching that great path of Australian history, that great achievement of the Australian people, cease.

I and others, almost exclusively from the crossbench, have risen in this place again and again and spoken about the value of the dollar. You should not come into this place if you do not understand the value of the dollar; you really should not be here.

Paul Keating did the right thing initially. He allowed the dollar to float, and it went down to 49c. That was the true value of the Australian dollar: 49c. Then he drove it up.

Honourable members interjecting—

Please listen. You might learn something.

Then he drove it up through the roof. Peter Costello came in and again did the right thing and allowed the dollar to free float. It went down to 5c. If you allow the dollar to free float, that is where it will go. Then, like Keating, for reasons best known to himself—or the Reserve Bank—he drove it up to over 92c.

I have asked for a picture; I do not have it here, but it is a picture of me filling up a car in Sao Paolo in Brazil. The car is an Australian motor car. I said, 'Is your fleet all Australian motor cars?' He said: 'Yes. The Holden motor car, the Caprice, is an excellent car. I have always had Holden Caprices but I won't be buying them next year.' I said, 'Why?' He said: 'Because your dollar has doubled in value and that means that, in terms of Australian money, I was paying $36,000 and now I'm paying $72,000. So I'm going to buy the Brazilian car which is $37,000. I don't think it's quite as good but I can't afford to pay $72,000.'

That is what the manager of Holden said today. If our interest rates are 2.7 per cent—that was the three-year average last time I looked—and the rest of the world's is an average of 0.2 per cent, it not only says to the world, 'Put your money here in Australia and buy Australian dollars because you'll get a much better interest rate'; it also says to the rest of the world that we have a policy of having a high dollar, which will continue. All I am saying is that, when it was allowed to free float, it came down. That is where it went. Both those men, Mr Keating and Mr Costello, allowed the dollar to free float and it went down to 50c. I hold up for the edification of the House that picture of me filling up a Holden motor car in Sao Paolo. If the dollar were allowed to free float today, when our economy is much narrower, then God bless people. Leading economists—including David Koch, who was on a morning program, and Ross Garnaut, with whom I disagree violently on many things—and business people throughout this country have said we must bring the dollar down.

Cattlemen were done incredible damage by the ban on live cattle export to Indonesia but we were already in trouble before that. We simply cannot live with the dollar. Our incomes in the cattle industry and the wheat industry and at Holden have effectively been cut in half because the dollar went down. We do not have a problem with wages if the dollar is cut in half. The people on my left talk all the time about wages being too high; I would suggest we let them set a good example. But I do not want to make cheap shots. I take that back.

I say to you: you will live in a country without the ability to build a motor vehicle. I sit under a picture of one of the greatest ever Australians, Jack McEwen. Jack McEwen said the third reason for having tariffs was that:

… I will never see my country plunged into another war without the ability to build a main battle tank.

The immediate solution to this problem, and our little tiny party has been screaming this for ages, is for every car bought under a government contract in Australia—which is 25 per cent of the cars in Australia—to be an Australian motor car. That is very easy, and the Americans have already done it in the steel industry. George Bush moved the legislation and it was carried through by Barack Obama. Both of them said that if it receives one dollar of government money, then it will contain 100 per cent American steel.

The Americans are attacking the Chinese for artificially holding their currency down, and they are. You can use the word artificial if you like but they are holding their currency down, no doubt about that. The Chinese have accused the Americans of holding their currency down—and they are, no doubt. No-one will ever accuse this country of holding its dollar down because we have actually pushed it up through the roof. One of the greatest damages done in this place was when Peter Costello—and I like Peter Costello personally—continually skited in this place that a high dollar was an indication of the success of the government. That comment demonstrates the complete opposite, but I am not here to denigrate him or anyone else today.

I agree with the amendment being pushed forward, to be quite frank with you, even though I also agree with the opposition that action should be taken. But let me say to you that when the Reserve Bank said they were reducing interest rates and addressing the issue of the value of the dollar—when they put that magic combination together—the dollar went down 20c. So we know where the answers are.

David Koch, for all his humour and light-heartedness on his program in the mornings that we all love, is also a very eminent economist. He put this proposition forward with great aggression, as did his wife and Ross Garnaut and many of the leading business figures in this country. But I have mines closing. I have cattlemen shooting themselves, very sadly, at the rate of one every five weeks now. The value of our dollar—

Government members interjecting—

There is a fellow here questioning that. I will give you the name of one of them: Jimmy Whelan. You can look it up. His son committed suicide nine weeks ago and you are laughing at that. You seem to think it is funny. You seem to think you are making a political statement about it.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member will withdraw that remark.

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

If there was a criticism there, I withdraw it. I want to stay positive as far as humanly possible here. But the situation is that, if you represent a country electorate and you do not know the pain that is going on, then I do not think you do represent a country electorate.

If the dollar drops in half then the income for all of those people—the grain growers, the dairymen, the cattlemen and the workers in the motor vehicle industry in Australia—will double. So you know where the answers lie. The immediate answer is to use the government contract to restrict them to purchasing Australian motor cars. It is my understanding that the cars of the Catholic schools in Queensland, for example, are bought under a government contract. I am told that 25 per cent of the cars in Australia are bought under government contracts. So the answer lies with the government.

I plead on behalf of every single Australian for the government to rescue this industry and to not watch our country be left out and lose the ability to make an electric motor, a tyre or now a motor car. What technology will we be left with in this country if we continue to pursue the government's policy that it is not their responsibility and it has nothing to do with them? It most certainly has. The answers are there. I have described them today. They do not come from me; they come from the most eminent economists in this country. I plead with the government to look at those solutions. (Time expired)

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The original question was that the motion be agreed to, to which the honourable Leader of the House has moved as an amendment that all the words after 'that' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question is that the amendment be agreed to.

Motion, as amended, agreed to.

Warren Truss (Wide Bay, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.