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

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

The national interest in maintaining aviation jobs in Australia.

I call upon those honourable 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—

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is a most important national debate. For all those Australians who are listening and thinking that at last this parliament is having an argument about the future of Qantas and the future of aviation jobs, please be advised that the Prime Minister, the Treasurer and the Deputy Prime Minister—the people who are advocating the sale of Qantas to foreign interests—have walked out of the chamber. So this is the quality of government we have in Australia. They will not be accountable in the parliament of Australia to debate the jobs.

The real shame of this debate about aviation jobs is that the Prime Minister and his team have created only one export industry in Australia since getting elected—and that is the export of Australian jobs overseas. It is not good enough for a government of Australia of whatever politics to advocate the dismantling of Australia's national carrier. It is not good enough to tell thousands of Qantas employees that the only plan the government has is: 'You are out of work.' It is not good enough for the government to tell the flight attendants, the pilots, the flight engineers, the licensed aviation maintenance engineers and the cleaners: 'The only plan we have for you is that your job will go overseas.' Next time government members fly in very safe Qantas planes and are served by very professional staff and see the not-very-well-paid cleaners queuing up on the aerobridge to clean up their mess on the plane, I hope they at least have the courage—because they do not have the courage to be here in the parliament—to say: 'Actually, we don't care about you. We don't care about your jobs. We've run out of ideas—except to ship them overseas.' This is a government that is in love with Orwellian language. Those opposite love that language. They said about the car workers, 'You have been liberated,' and that means: 'You're unemployed.' They have said about Qantas, 'We will free you from your shackles.' Obviously the Prime Minister picked up the word 'freedom' at Mandela's funeral, but he has not understood that there is no freedom in unemployment. There is no freedom in not fighting for Australian jobs. There is no freedom in dismantling the skills of the aviation maintenance industry. There is no freedom in telling flight crews of the international business that they are probably better off getting a job in the gulf or in Asia, because we are not going to fight to keep their jobs here. I for one am grateful—

Mr Whiteley interjecting—

You can have your crack, sunshine! Your leader isn't here. Why don't you observe the rules? What we say—

Mr Whiteley interjecting—

Sunshine, you will get your go. Why don't we say to every pilot in Australia—they have spent decades training; they have done the courses; their families have done without them: 'We don't want you here.' I know what happened after Ansett. Thousands of people had to move overseas. Yes, it is a good thing that Virgin is in Australia, but remember that when we had Ansett and Qantas we had thousands more jobs than we do now. I know what happens when you start dismantling an airline: you start downgrading the skills and quality of Australian aviation. Australian aviation served us through two world wars. Australian aviation has served us in helping to get Australians out of Beirut and get people out of Bangkok. I loathe the false patriotism of those people opposite, who say, 'We're trying to free Qantas.' No, you're not. You are trying to kill Qantas.

Let us look at the arguments that those opposite are using. They have never seen an argument they could not turn on its head, that black is not white and white is not black. They say they are doing Qantas a favour. Qantas does not want your favours. It wants you to do what you said to it two or three months ago—give it a debt guarantee. Let us have a look at the cynical, dithering, deceitful conduct we have seen in the last three years from this government. They have tried to blame carbon. They said carbon is to blame. Then last night, somewhat annoyingly, Qantas said, 'Carbon is not the issue.' Have those opposite no shame? Even after Qantas said that carbon is not the issue these people still believe that if they stick with the big lie long enough people will swallow it. No, they won't. Not this time, they won't. Those opposite have also tried to say that they are not into cheque-book support. Tell that to Cadbury. Why is it that chocolate is a preferred Liberal industry but airlines are not? What is it that chocolate has but aviation hasn't? What an inconsistent bunch of roosters you are! Inconsistency is your watchword.

But if we want to talk about the cynicism of those opposite we should talk about this lie about the Qantas Sale Act. They say that if you get rid of part 3 of the Qantas Sale Act it will all be happy days and blue skies and planes flying. No, it won't. I have started to war-game what will happen if the coalition get through their job-killing propositions. First of all, Qantas will have to get another air-operating certificate. Each business has to have one. Qantas has one now; it would have to get a second air-operating certificate. That will take a year. Oh my goodness! We have wasted three months, but these brain surgeons opposite are going to take another year. Then of course you have got to demerge the business—they didn't think about that, did they? The merger of TAA and Qantas in 1996 took one year. Do they think in Abbott land that you can click your fingers, get a pair of scissors, cut the red tape, free Qantas from the shackles and demerge in less than a year? It will take a year. And in the meantime Qantas will struggle.

A government member: Calm down!

Calm down, he says! You are killing the jobs. You should be more excited about it. Let us look at what else will take time. The employees—did I mention that magic word that never passes the lips of the Liberals? What about the employees? There are 25,000 to 30,000 people working at Qantas. When you split the airline in two according to your great plan you will have 10,000-plus who will have to be transferred to the new business. Have you thought about how you will do that? Have you thought about the redundancies? Of course you haven't thought about them. What a silly question! Then you are going to have to take 10,000-plus employees and reemploy them. You are going to put some on the same terms; you are going to make some redundant.

Mr Sukkar interjecting—

You haven't thought about a thing, Member for Deakin, not for some time! What else do we have to do? Let us say that we have spent our year demerging. We have got the air-operating certificate. We have worked out who owns the aeroplanes. We have handled the employees on this great idea to sell the business overseas. Who is going to buy it? The obvious buyers in the industry are from the Middle East or China. They will have to go through a Foreign Investment Review Board process. That will take up to two years.

Ms Scott interjecting—

It is not a conspiracy; it is just a fact, Member for Lindsay. It is going to take up to two years to get someone to put in some foreign capital under this great rush of blood to the head that the Abbott cabinet had last night. Imagine the Foreign Investment Review Board process. You lot do not fill me with a lot of confidence when it comes to the Foreign Investment Review Board. You panicked on GrainCorp. Qantas is GrainCorp on steroids. You will not have that ticker to do it.

As a solution to Qantas you are proposing to go down a path that will take up to two years to complete. At the end we will have fewer jobs and no doubt, knowing this government in an election year, you will panic when you have a look at who is buying it. What is the reason other than GrainCorp that I am so confident that you will panic? Warren Truss, the well-known luminary and intellectual thinker of the coalition, said:

… if one foreign investor has gotten 49 per cent of the airline, then its strategic policy is likely to change, the attitude of its board would change and we could therefore not be confident anymore that Qantas would put the interests of Australia first.

Warren Truss is proof that even a stopped clock is right twice a day. He is correct. He could not be confident of it putting Australia's interests first. There you have it, people of Australia, ladies and gentlemen: we have a government that is proposing a plan which will send thousands of jobs offshore, which has been the product of some cynical exercise to blame everyone else. But they should buy a mirror and look at the real problem. This plan clearly has more holes in it than Swiss cheese.

Then we get to what I think the real issue is. They want to turn the spirit of Australia into the ghost of Australia. They are saying, 'Here's another company where we won't fight for jobs.' Listen to the roll call: Holden, Toyota, Alcoa, Electrolux, Gove, Qantas. How dare they pretend to be interested in Australian jobs!

They have not fought for any jobs. When will it end?

The problem with the government is that they are zealots—they are extremists. They have never seen an Aussie job they will fight for. The world is too hard. They tell us about level playing fields, but world aviation is not a level playing field. Most aviation businesses in the world have government support. We have these single-minded extremists who will never fight for a job in Australia, so will the last Abbott government minister on the last job turn the lights out? They will not fight for jobs, they will not stand up for Australian aviation, they know that they have taken too long to get to this point and they know their solution is about politics, it is not about jobs. Shame!

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Assistant Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this matter of public importance discussion on aviation. It appears that we have gone back in time—hearing members opposite talking about protectionism and tariff barriers as an approach to government. Former Prime Minister Gillard wrote a big cheque to Ford to secure Ford's future in this country and what happened? They left! That represented a total chequebook policy, lacking any focus on good industry policy. It may be news to the members of the opposition, but it is not the 1990s anymore. Since the 1990s the planes have changed, the industries have changed, the maintenance required has changed and the global aviation landscape has changed, but the one thing that has not changed is the good old ALP, who are still stuck in the past. The Leader of the Opposition may not be aware that the Super Constellation is no longer part of the Qantas fleet—they have changed aircraft since then. The shadow minister for employment may also be interested to know that the government no longer has a major shareholding in Qantas. These are things of the past.

This MPI purports to be about the national interest in maintaining aviation jobs in Australia. The best thing we can do for aviation jobs in Australia is to have an efficient, competitive, effective aviation industry, not one that is propped up by government. It is time to move into the 21st century and create a level playing field for all airlines based in Australia. By removing part 3 of the Qantas Sale Act 1992 we are creating a single regulatory framework for all Australian international airlines. Australians want a strong and competitive Qantas. The existing Qantas Sale Act places restrictions on Qantas that give its competitors an advantage. Why is the opposition so keen to advantage the competitors of Qantas? We can only wonder. These changes that the government is proposing will deliver flexibility for Qantas consistent with other airlines based in Australia. Any foreign investment will continue to be subject to consideration and approval by the Foreign Investment Review Board. We do not believe in government by chequebook. Labor can only think of giving Qantas a subsidy, but the coalition is not about playing favourites. We want to give Qantas a hand up not a handout. Labor privatised Qantas and now they should join with the coalition and unshackle Qantas from the restrictions that are hampering its ability to compete.

Ten years ago Labor were on the record as having an open mind on changing the foreign ownership restrictions in the Qantas Sale Act—the Prime Minister alluded to that in question time. In 2014, it should be no different. Sadly the xenophobic elements of the Labor Party have been out in the community today, trying to scare Australians about what might happen if foreigners were to suddenly increase their holdings in Qantas. We all know what happens when foreigners invest in Australian airlines—we have got Virgin, we have got Rex and we have got Skywest, all of which have significant levels of foreign ownership. The last time I was on a Virgin flight I found that the crew was Australian. The last time I was on a Rex flight the food was Australian. They continue to provide that Australian service. Labor is wrong when it says that these changes will shift all of Qantas's business overseas. Labor is clearly not familiar with the complex and stringent regulatory system that is in place for airlines operating in this country.

Our international air service agreements impose ownership and control restrictions to ensure only Australian international airlines can access our air traffic rights. Under these restrictions Australian international airlines must be substantially owned and effectively controlled by Australian nationals, at least two-thirds of the board members must be Australian citizens, the chairperson of the board must be an Australian citizen, the airline's head office must be in Australia and the airline's operational base must be in Australia. The government has no plans to change these criteria, which will continue to apply to Qantas's international operations and other Australian international airlines. The Fair Work Act, the Corporations Act, the immigration laws and other regulations will continue to apply just as they apply to other businesses operating in Australia.

The best thing that Labor can do to support Qantas, however, is to support the legislation which the government will be putting into the House but also it can help us scrap the—

Government members: Carbon tax.

We want to scrap the carbon tax. Have members opposite thought for a moment how many people could we employ for $106 million a year? Have members opposite done that calculation? I would say it is probably more than a thousand, but they have not stopped to think how many jobs they are destroying with their job-destroying carbon tax. We want Qantas to compete in a low-tax, low-cost environment that means getting rid of the—

Government members: Carbon tax.

It means getting rid of the carbon tax. John Borghetti from Virgin said, and I will read it carefully so that the members opposite can hear:

… the best assistance the government and the opposition can provide is the removal of the—

Government members: Carbon tax.

He goes on:

… which has cost this industry hundreds of millions of dollars.

Those opposite have all gone—they clearly do not care about the future of Qantas.

Over and above the issue of the carbon tax, there is the issue of a strong economy. We are all about building a strong economy. The best way we can have a strong aviation industry is to have a strong economy so more Australians and more business travellers can afford to travel on our airlines. What is the opposition doing? They are standing in the way of the repeal of the carbon tax. They are standing in the way of the repeal of the mining tax. They are standing in the way of our efforts to reduce red tape. They are standing in the way of our efforts to introduce an ABCC with real bite, that can return the rule of law to our construction industry. They are standing in the way of us returning to a balanced budget, getting the budget back in the black and addressing the black hole of debt that the previous government left us. We have a plan for the future of Australia. It primarily involves a strong economy, but an important part of that plan is a strong, efficient, effective aviation industry. I would look to the members of the opposition—

A government member: Where are they? They're not here for their own MPI.

Yes, they have all got up and left us—to go back to their electorates, talk to those employees of Qantas and tell them why a carbon tax is good for their job prospects, while it is fact that a carbon tax will probably cost more than 1,000 jobs to Qantas in the years ahead. It is $106 million and rising.

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

Rubbish!

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Assistant Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You do the sums. The member for Grayndler says 'rubbish'. It is $106 million. The way that the member for Grayndler managed the economy was by running up huge debt and running up budget deficit after budget deficit. Remember the member for Lilley when he came into this place at budget time and said, 'The four surpluses I announce tonight,' and what did he deliver? He delivered the biggest deficit we have ever seen.

Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He didn't see the minus sign in front.

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Assistant Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, he missed the minus sign. The member for Paterson informs me that the member for Lilley, our former Treasurer, missed the minus sign when he was reading the budget papers and said, 'The four surpluses I announce tonight'! We are about working to get the budget back in the black, building a strong economy and delivering surpluses into the future. That is what we are about. Also, very importantly, we are about having a strong, efficient and effective aviation industry. We are not going to achieve that by protectionism. We are not going to achieve that by artificially propping up Qantas. The best way to do that is to free it of the shackles that are impeding its ability to compete in an efficient way against its competitors.

We know that the Labor Party have in the past considered the issue of changing the foreign ownership restrictions; but when the idea comes from the government, what do they do? They immediately oppose it. They know the repeal of the carbon tax would be good for the aviation industry, but what do they do? They oppose the repeal of the carbon tax. They know it is costing jobs. They know it is costing the people that they purport to represent, yet still they continue with this old protectionist dogma. Protection is no substitute for an efficient airline industry run on a competitive basis. I look forward to the members opposite changing their view, seeing the light, as it were, getting behind the government and supporting our proposed change so that we can have a strong, efficient Qantas into the future, so that the aviation industry can prosper and so that the kangaroo can continue to fly.

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

That was an embarrassing performance from the junior minister in a government that has shown contempt for Qantas as a company, contempt for Qantas's workers and contempt for Qantas's shareholders and walked away from the national interest. They have shown yet again today that they had a plan to get into government but not a plan to govern. So relentlessly negative were they in opposition that they did not think through any of the proper policy principles that they would be called upon when able to make decisions, and it is nowhere more evident than with regard to Qantas.

It is 88 days since the downgrade of Qantas. During 80-plus of those 88 days, those opposite—from the Treasurer to the transport minister to all those responsible—held out the offer of a debt guarantee. They did it in private; they did it in public. They said what the conditions were. And now, at the last minute—after Qantas factored that into the decisions that they made last Thursday and after shareholders factored it in and saw an increase in the share price of some 10 per cent—they pulled the rug out and walked away. Today we know that they even did due diligence. They used taxpayers' funds to get PricewaterhouseCoopers, one of the big four companies, to do due diligence on the proposal that they said on the record they were supporting. Let us have a look at what it was. Qantas were not asking for a handout but for a debt guarantee. The government teased Qantas, they teased the markets and then they walked away from it.

They speak about the level playing field. Well, let us be very clear—Virgin got a capital injection in November from three government-backed airlines: Singapore; Etihad, backed by the government of the UAE; and also Air New Zealand, backed by the government of New Zealand. They got government support not just from Australia but from the governments of Singapore, UAE and New Zealand. That is fine. But, under those circumstances, the Australian government should have provided that support. We know that that is the case. The Prime Minister presents himself as some sort of new broom, a type of ideological terminator, one who will force every company to stand on their own. All he is doing is terminating Australian jobs right across the economy.

In 2009 I produced an aviation white paper—that is what good governments do; detailed policy development over two years of consultation with the sector—and it recommended changes to the 35-25 rules. The government was asked about this:

Mr Hockey the Aviation White Paper, Anthony Albanese flagged a relaxing of our foreign ownership in Qantas and allowing maybe up to 49% to be foreign-owned…

This is what he said:

Well this is something I have previously been on the record about. Very concerned about any dilution of Australian control of Qantas. Qantas has, over the years, tried to increase foreign investment in the airline. We have been very concerned for a number of reasons. First and foremost, Qantas is an Australian icon and Qantas undertakes significant tasks in the national interest …

That is what Joe Hockey had to say very clearly.

And it was not just him. Warren Truss, who was then the shadow transport minister had this to say on the day:

The Government’s decision to allow a single foreign investor to own 49 percent of Qantas would deliver effective control to a foreign investor, including possibly a competitor airline. Loss of effective Australian control could leave Australia without an airline primarily committed to our interests.

That is what he had to say at that time. So do not come here and talk to us about reform! You rejected reform in 2009. Now you are rejecting what Qantas has requested and what you said you would deliver. Had you not gone out there and created that impression in the market, you might have a semblance of credibility. But you have none, because you have refused to stand up for Australian jobs.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Before I call the next speaker I might remind both sides of the chamber to refer their comments through the chair, not at the chair. I think I have some credibility! I did not want to pull you up in full flight, member for Grayndler, but it is just a timely reminder to both sides of the chamber. It is a common habit.

Teresa Gambaro (Brisbane, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I am very pleased to be standing here today to speak to this matter of public importance about maintaining aviation jobs in Australia. What is not in the public's interest at the moment is the manner in which the Leader of the Opposition and the Greens have sought to play politics on this issue to the detriment of the aviation industry in this country and the thousands of Australians that it employs. What the aviation industry in this country needs right now is leadership. It needs the government to get out of its way. It needs to unshackle the legislative obstacles that prevent the industry from operating efficiently and competitively. It does not need political figures misleading the public with false statements and scaremongering for their own short-sighted political advantage and gain.

That is why the Abbott government is levelling the aviation playing field. We have a clear way forward, and that clear way is giving Qantas its freedom. We are making changes that will mean we have two very strong airlines that fly Australians and employ Australians—Virgin and Qantas.

The government will move to a single regulatory framework for all Australian international airlines. As soon as possible, legislation will be introduced to remove the foreign ownership restrictions and conditions that apply to Qantas, and particularly to their business operations contained in part 3 of the Qantas Sale Act 1992. Removing these conditions is the best way to ensure that Qantas can secure Australian jobs now and into the future by making it more competitive—and also by removing the carbon tax. If the opposition had bothered to do their job, and if they had done any homework on this issue they would know that over the last 20 years the passenger aviation industry has undergone some enormous structural changes all around the world. Germany and the UK are probably the most robust examples of where privately-run airlines have been successful and they have not received any government assistance whatsoever. It is time to undertake a complete structural review of the aviation and airline industry in Australia in line with what our needs are for the 21st century. This is the discussion that we need to have, and if the Labor Party and the Greens were serious about maintaining jobs in the aviation industry they would be part of this process and not be doing everything they possibly can to derail it.

Even the Leader of the Opposition has made the point that we should look to G20 nations as a benchmark for our continued protection of a national airline. Yet when we do, we see that since 1987 Japan, Canada, Britain, Italy, France, Germany, Mexico and South Korea have divested themselves of state-owned airlines. Of the G20 countries, only Russia, India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Argentina and China maintain any majority holding in their airlines.

Twelve years ago Labor said that they were on the record as having an open mind about changing foreign ownership restrictions in the Qantas Sale Act. In 2014 it should be no different. So rather than misleading the Australian public through scaremongering and preying upon patriotic nostalgia, Labor and the Greens should tell Australians the truth. And the truth is that under the changes the government is proposing Qantas would still be subject to the Air Navigation Act which limits foreign ownership in Australian international airlines to 49 per cent. The Air Navigation Act applies to all other airlines, including Virgin and the Qantas subsidiary, Jetstar. This means that Qantas international would have to stay majority Australian owned. As for the domestic operations, those will be subject to review by the Foreign Investment Review Board.

The changes being proposed by the government are the best policy response to the difficulties that are being faced not just by Qantas but by the aviation industry in this country as a whole. We need to take an important step forward now. Now is the time to unshackle Qantas from the Qantas Sale Act. This opposition should move out of the way and help the government to make Qantas more competitive so that they can operate in a truly international market. This is the path of the future of aviation for Australia.

Kate Ellis (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I stand up today because I know that it is my responsibility actually to stand up in this place and fight for the jobs of local residents. It is such a pity that those opposite cannot come to the same simple realisation. Following Qantas's announcement of 5,000 job losses, in my local community in Adelaide we have seen headlines like the following: 'Qantas cuts to hit Adelaide hard', 'Adelaide and Melbourne hardest hit by Qantas cuts' and 'SA Qantas workers angry and shocked'. As a South Australian MP I would particularly like to place on the record my concern and support for these hardworking local residents who now face crippling uncertainty and the ever-present threat of imminent unemployment.

This is particularly hard in my home state because, whilst we have seen in Australia one job loss for every three minutes that the Abbott government has been in office, we know that we have been hit particularly hard in South Australia. First they goaded Holden out of the country. In the PM's words, the Holden workers were 'liberated' from their employment by the decision of Holden to leave. Now we see staff in catering, baggage handling and services facing a similar fate. We know that in Adelaide about 100 local baggage handlers and 150 service staff, including check-in workers, were informed by management of the redundancies. This comes on top of Qantas's previous announcement that 150 jobs would go when Adelaide's Q Catering facility closed at the end of March.

I want to make one thing particularly clear here. These are hardworking, diligent and committed employees. Having had the chance to meet recently with the catering staff and hear from them firsthand of their years of loyal service, of their concern and of their uncertainty, I know that they have done absolutely nothing to deserve this. They deserve a government that will stand up and fight for them in this parliament. Similarly, the baggage handlers at Adelaide airport have worked hard and have successfully improved their productivity. Yet they too now face an unclear and all-too-uncertain future. I note that they told their Transport Workers Union organisers that they feel that they are being punished after they improved productivity. How do you think they feel about having a government that will do absolutely nothing to assist them, will do nothing to support them and has no plan whatsoever for their futures?

This morning I had the chance to speak to someone with a long and proud history of fighting for jobs at Adelaide airport. I spoke to the former member for Hindmarsh, Steve Georganas, who has been down at the airport speaking directly with Qantas workers about how they are feeling at the moment. He told me it is the uncertainty that is killing them. He told me that they believe talk of foreign ownership will mean that even more jobs will be moved offshore and that their jobs will be placed in greater jeopardy. Unfortunately, they are right about this. What those opposite are proposing with the Qantas Sales Act could put at risk tens of thousands of further jobs, with airlines deciding to move their maintenance and facilities offshore.

We do not expect the government to be able to protect every job in Australia. We are not saying that. What we are saying is that we expect the government to act to support workers who are in this situation and we are expect a government who will not make this uncertainty even greater. The new member for Hindmarsh has dismally failed another test. He campaigned citing job security as the biggest issue for his community. He is not wrong about that. But he did not tell the community that he intended to make it worse by voting to jeopardise even more local jobs. We come here with an obligation to fight for our communities, not to sit here mutely and blindly follow the Prime Minister as he threatens to send more of our local jobs offshore. I say to the member for Hindmarsh: if you were so willing to tell the local community what a big issue job security was before the election, I challenge you to stand up and explain directly to the Qantas workers in your electorate why you are going to use your vote to place their jobs at even greater jeopardy. I challenge you to go and visit them and tell them that face to face. It is not enough to say before the election that you care about jobs if you then come in here and use your situation to place in jeopardy the jobs of Qantas workers at Adelaide airport. I say to all of those opposite, but particularly to the member for Hindmarsh: you need to stand up when it counts for local workers. Your opportunity to stand up for airport workers will come, and you will be judged on how you respond.

Matt Williams (Hindmarsh, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The hypocrisy of members opposite on this MPI today is absolutely breathtaking. This is the crowd under which, in six years, one in 10 manufacturing jobs in Australia was lost—one in 10 across the entire country. These are the people on whose watch the unemployment rolls increased by 200,000 people. That is 200,000 people more unemployed and one in 10 manufacturing jobs lost—all in the space of a very, very unpleasant six years. That is the record that we are confronted with. To see their confected outrage and purported affinity for workers, given that record, is really quite outrageous.

The government has a very clear plan for jobs. There are many elements to it. One of them is to get rid of the huge amounts of red tape that the previous government put in place in their six sorry years of stewardship of the country. We will be getting rid of more than 8,000 regulations shortly. We have also put in place important environmental approvals for more than $400 billion worth of projects. That is critical. The last thing you want is big projects tied up in lengthy and opaque approval processes. What you want is jobs in infrastructure. That is what this government is committed to. We will also help to generate jobs through reinstituting the ABCC, to help the very troubled construction industry. It is really very important to identify all of the issues that we are seeing in that industry.

The government's plans in relation to Qantas are absolutely what Qantas and the broader aviation industry needs. What Qantas needs is the ability to stand on its own two feet and to fight in the marketplace like every other company does. The fact is that Virgin and other airlines today have an advantage over Qantas. That advantage is that they can source foreign capital in a way that Qantas cannot. What that means is that Qantas is shackled and it is more difficult for Qantas to invest for growth. In any business, whether it is aviation or the media industry—regardless of what it is—no business wants to be in a position where it is competing in an unfair manner against its competitors. All anybody asks of government is the capacity to show up, do their best work and succeed in the marketplace. That is what Qantas should be allowed to do. We have seen 9,000 new jobs generated by Virgin in the past decade or so as a result of competition in the aviation industry. That is a good thing. That demonstrates that, when you enable companies to compete, to put forward products to consumers and to take some risk and grow, you generate economic activity. You do not generate economic activity by placing a government diktat from on high on the marketplace; you generate jobs by creating a level and fair playing field and enabling businesses to get on and do what they do best, which is to invest in the future of the nation.

Better Labor Parties in previous decades have understood the need to make sometimes difficult decisions. They have understood the need for reform. The Keating and Hawke governments made some decisions which were, as the Prime Minister said today, difficult at the time but certainly right for the long-term future of the nation. They had the guts to walk away from cheap populism. They knew that Australia's future demanded more than an easy headline and a simple sound bite, that it actually required the policy framework to allow our economy to grow.

Unfortunately, the current opposition bears very little resemblance to those previous Labor governments. When we see an opportunity for structural reform, they see an opportunity simply for a cheap headline. When you are dealing with a matter as important as the future of the Australian aviation industry, it is absolutely critical not to play politics with it but to do the right thing by the aviation industry and Qantas. Get rid of the carbon tax and get the playing field level; that is how you generate jobs.

Alannah Mactiernan (Perth, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to be part of this debate today, because I think there has been the most extraordinary lack of insight on the part of the government in this matter. I recall September 2001, when Ansett collapsed nationally. This created chaos across the state of Western Australia not just because of the collapse of Ansett but also because along with it came the collapse of its wholly owned entity Skywest. This had a catastrophic impact on tourism across Western Australia, and not only on tourism—on all business in our regional areas. Outside the mining sector it created an enormous problem for people running their businesses. We came to understand that, because of the impact of this on the rest of the economy—not just that company and its employees—we had to take some extraordinary steps.

We took the step to regulate all of those routes that previously had been flown by Skywest, with the exception of the Pilbara. We actually created a contestable process where we would only allow one airline to operate into those routes. We needed to do that not because we were anticompetitive but because we understood we had to take exceptional measures to restore those airlines and restore those economies. I put it to you today that this is exactly what we need to do in this situation.

Qantas has made it very clear that, amendment or no amendment to the Qantas Sale Act, they will need an underwriting of their capital needs over the next few years, so the solution that is being proposed is not going to work. Indeed, if it worked, it would come at a very terrible cost: the cost of the loss of Australian ownership and those obligations to be based in Australia. It will see a loss of focus on Australia, particularly as it is most likely that, if we are going to go down this path, Qantas will not just be foreign owned but also be owned by foreign governments.

I was very surprised when the Prime Minister said yesterday that Labor was still living in the good old days of state owned airlines but he was not. I hate to say it to the Prime Minister, but the good old days of state ownership are very much with us in Australia. I do not know how we can just completely gloss over this. Virgin's parent holding company is 57 per cent owned by foreign governments, not just foreign owned. We have Air New Zealand. Air New Zealand owns around 20 per cent, and it is 53 per cent owned by the New Zealand government. We have Singapore Airlines, which has about 20 per cent, and that is 55 per cent owned by the Singaporean government. Etihad, which is the other foreign airline, is fully owned by the Abu Dhabi government.

We understand that the Air Navigation Act requires 51 per cent ownership, but we all understand how the Virgin restructuring has worked. There is no bashfulness about the motivation of those foreign governments for their investment. They have made it very clear that their investment in Virgin Australia is designed to use Virgin domestic to feed their respective airlines' international business. That is fine, but we all have to understand we do not want our entire national airline and all of the airline business in Western Australia, fundamentally, to have direction set by the needs of foreign governments. We need to intervene to protect our airlines in order to ensure that the rest of our economy that is supported by these airlines works.

There are in fact 138 airlines around the world that are owned by governments— (Time expired)

Matt Williams (Hindmarsh, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The aviation industry has been one that has shown great ingenuity over the years. The tyranny of distance that besets many of our forebears has disappeared as the industry has grown and developed, making transportation much more accessible. In Adelaide we now think of going over to Melbourne as nothing, whereas previously it was a major undertaking. I love going over to watch my beloved Port Adelaide in the theatre of dreams at the MCG. I know that buck shows and hen shows love travelling to the Gold Coast or Sydney, and that is because of competitive airfares in the aviation sector.

Adelaide Airport is in my electorate and is a major employer, and I feel for the many Qantas workers who have lost their jobs over a number of years, not just in the announcement last week. A number of the workers at the airport have children at my local primary school, where my children go. I know them personally and they will be feeling the brunt of this. Let us remember that there have been major job losses in South Australia, going back to Mitsubishi, when Labor was in power at both the state and the federal level in 2008. Cobham is a major employer in the aviation industry and they work in the mining services sector, a sector that we need to see grow and develop—and we need to get rid of the mining tax.

My office has had discussions with an employer in the engineering section of Qantas who is trying to work out how to best move through these difficult times. We empathise with these workers and their families. These job losses announced last week by Qantas are disappointing and create great uncertainty for families. Let us remember what the Qantas CEO Alan Joyce said last week, 'Qantas in contrast is restricted from competing effectively due to the Qantas Sale Act, which limits the level of foreign investment in the airline and determines where our operations are performed.' We have acted quickly to help Qantas. We need to ensure that there is a level playing field for Qantas and that their operations are not adversely affected.

The government call on the opposition to back our changes to help Qantas, whether it be the sales tax, sorry, the carbon tax—I have taxes on my mind when I talk about the opposition—or the changes to part 3 of the Qantas Sale Act. We want to help Qantas navigate through these challenging times. We know that the carbon tax is a $106 million hit to Qantas, just as it is a $27 million hit to Virgin and other airlines. If the member for Adelaide were really sincere about saving jobs, helping the economy and helping Qantas, she would tell her colleagues to repeal the carbon tax and give Qantas that money so they can employ people and save jobs, not lose them. If Labor are really concerned about losing jobs overseas then do not disadvantage Australian companies. Lower taxes and help the consumers who at the moment are benefiting from competitive airfares and a viable aviation industry. Axe the carbon tax, amend the Qantas Sale Act and get out of the way and help Qantas.

Matt Thistlethwaite (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This morning I rang a Qantas employee, a pilot who has worked for Qantas for 26 years who lives in my electorate. I asked him for his view on what had gone on over the last 24 hours. He is a loyal Qantas employee, proud of the fact that he works for our nation's carrier. His view is that many of the employees are despairing over what has gone on at Qantas. The word he used to describe what this government did to Qantas last night was 'skulduggery'. I could not have put it better myself.

On 6 December Qantas had its credit rating downgraded. Since that time it has been negotiating with this government for assistance, for some form of debt guarantee to ensure that it can go to the market to raise capital to compete with Virgin. The government have been listening; they have been negotiating. On 28 November, the Treasurer said about Qantas that there is significant community benefit in having a national carrier. He also said that the conditions were now in place for Qantas to have government support. What happened last night? Last night, the Prime Minister rolled the Treasurer in cabinet and announced something else. He said to Qantas that the negotiations regarding a debt guarantee would not be met and that they would not have the satisfaction of being able to go to the market with that guaranteed government support—skulduggery, indeed.

Last night this government chopped the tail off the flying kangaroo. They have left it rudderless, open to being split up, with the possibility of its head office going overseas, its board being taken over by foreign companies and its workers' jobs going overseas. Qantas is a very important business to the Australian economy. It employs 30,000 Australians—proud, hardworking, dedicated men and women who work for our nation's carrier. It spends $6 billion on goods and services in the Australian economy, and adds $1.4 billion in direct and indirect taxes, contributing revenue to our nation to fund our hospitals, our roads and our schools. Qantas passengers spend $28 billion on tourism in Australia. As Tim Harcourt, an airport economist from the University of New South Wales, said: 'The United States has Coca-Cola. Germany has BMW. Sweden has IKEA. Finland has Nokia. Italy has Alpha Romeo. Australia has Qantas.'

Qantas is the iconic Australian business, with the world's greatest safety record, and its dedicated and skilled employees are all now at risk because of this government. This government do not listen. Qantas has been seeking support in the form of a debt guarantee for some three months now. It has been asking the government to seriously look at this issue so it can compete with Virgin, who is backed by foreign government owned airlines. Yesterday, Qantas said that its difficult situation had nothing to do with carbon pricing—no issue at all with carbon pricing. Those were the words of the Qantas executive—that it had nothing to do with carbon pricing. What has this government done? It has ignored the pleas of Qantas and acted today to cut off the tail of our nation's airline.

This argument that they are unshackling Qantas is complete garbage. Qantas is allowed a level of foreign ownership of 49 per cent. The current level of foreign ownership of Qantas is 38 per cent. Foreigners can invest in Qantas at the moment. There are no restrictions at the moment because the level of foreign ownership is not at the maximum. The government are also saying that Qantas should be allowed to be split up, that Qantas should be allowed to divide its domestic and international businesses. Yesterday, they worked out that Qantas international needs to remain an Australian carrier and that a level of investment above 49 per cent is not allowed, but it is allowed for the domestic business. You can split it up and sell off the domestic business. The facts are these: Qantas domestic made a $57 million profit in the first half of this year. Those opposite want to allow Qantas to be split up and the profitable side of the business sold off to foreign investors, with jobs going overseas, whilst we have to maintain an unprofitable, international business here in Australia. (Time expired)

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Abbott-Truss government is absolutely committed to maintaining aviation jobs in Australia. We fully recognise the national interest in having a strong, viable aviation sector. That is why we are now taking the responsible action announced yesterday that we will not only ensure the future survival of Qantas but also we will protect as many aviation jobs in Australia as possible. This proposal, as outlined by the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, is exactly what Qantas has asked for, and it is the most responsible course of action in the circumstances facing by the company. Responsibility: that is governing. It was not something we saw over the past six years but it is something we are starting to see under a responsible, mature, coalition government.

The government's proposal is straightforward and even members opposite should understand it. In fact, it is my hope that they support it, but dreams are free. All we are proposing to do is level the playing field so that Qantas can compete on the same basis as its competitors, so that it can operate freely, in a responsible way. We are proposing to remove the shackles that Labor placed on Qantas when it sold the airline off. Labor sold the airline off— something that member for Gorton has not quite worked out yet. Specifically, the government proposes to repeal part 3 of the Qantas Sale Act, which places restrictions on the company's ownership and governance. By not supporting our proposal, Labor is risking Australian jobs. It is as simple as that.

The next best thing we can do is to remove the carbon tax because it is a massive burden on all airlines, including Qantas. Yet those opposite, particularly the opposition in the Senate, along with Greens, refuse to accept the will of the Australian people. They refuse to accept this government's pledge to help Australian businesses and families by scrapping the carbon tax and relieving families of the impost placed on them by the previous government.

The opposition refuses to accept that when the Australian people voted on 7 September 2013 the message was patently clear—they did not want a carbon tax, that they did not want a Labor government. Get with the program! So unlike those opposite, who actually privatised Qantas and imposed a carbon tax on Australian businesses and families, we are a government focused on keeping our promises. We are a government committed to removing the carbon tax and repealing the Qantas Sale Act and not playing favourites in the Australian aviation industry. Instead, we want to save the aviation industry money by listening to the Australian people and removing the $106 million cost which the carbon tax placed on Qantas by those opposite. We want Qantas to operate, as the Prime Minister said over and over again today in question time, under exactly the same rules as Virgin and other airlines and we do not want to subject any airline to a job-killing carbon tax.

I represent a regional area and I know you do, too, Deputy Speaker Scott. Regional airlines, such as, Regional Express, Rex, provide a vital service to many communities throughout rural and remote Australia, just like the member for Farrer, Ms Ley, the minister here at the table. The member for Farrer is a pilot who knows full well the role Rex plays.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Invaluable.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How true. The airline has 48 aircraft flying to 36 destinations. In December 2013, the company carried 84,000 passengers. Rex also faces the challenges of a highly competitive industry—aviation is a tough industry—and cost pressures such as high wage costs and a job-killing carbon tax. Rex profits are down, with a 60 per cent slump in half-yearly profits. Despite this, Rex has not asked for a government debt guarantee or a blank cheque. They have not asked for a handout. In 2012-13, Rex paid $2.4 million in carbon tax—$2.4 million! In the first half of this year, 2013-14, Rex has already paid $1.3 million in carbon tax liabilities. I spoke to the deputy chairman of Rex, John Sharp, in parliament just the other day. He is astounded by the impost that is still being placed on Rex, a fine regional company—albeit foreign owned—doing a great job for regional Australians. John Sharp cannot believe the impost being place on Rex and the fact that Labor will not get out of the way, or perhaps even get in the way, to help us to remove the carbon tax.

Rex was established in 2002 following the collapse of Ansett in September 2001 and is a merger of the regional passenger arms of Ansett, Hazelton and Kendell. Rex does a fine job but is paying a lot of the profits in the carbon tax. I urge Labor to get on board with us and to remove this job-killing tax.