Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Trade and Investment. Will the government now work with Labor to legislate labour market testing for projects over $150 million, ensuring jobs are advertised locally first; introduce safeguards which ensure Australian wages are not undercut and overseas workers are not exploited; and implement safeguards which ensure 457 visa holders meet state and territory licensing requirements?

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Members on my right will cease interjecting.

Ms Butler interjecting—

The member for Griffith!

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade and Investment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for his question. We have said in response, as the Prime Minister confirmed in answer to the first question, that, for the first time, we have seen something written down that seeks to explain, in some way—

Ms Butler interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Griffith is warned!

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade and Investment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

the agitation, the abuse, the accusations and the sound bites that have been characteristic of the debate on the other side of the parliament.

Ms Butler interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Griffith has been warned!

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade and Investment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do note—and the member who asked this question should have known this—that his own party has accepted that nothing in the agreement, nothing in the MOU and nothing in the side letters will change, and we thank you for that. When you get on top of these issues you will do a better job of framing some of the questions that are put to this House.

Ms MacTiernan interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Perth.

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade and Investment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The principal criteria by which we will judge the measures that are being put forward are, firstly, that we will not entertain anything that discriminates against the Chinese. This is a non-discriminatory migration policy we run, yet the—

Mr Bowen interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for McMahon.

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade and Investment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

campaign run by the CFMEU—

Mr Dreyfus interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Isaacs.

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade and Investment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

runs counter to our policy in this regard.

Mr Mitchell interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for McEwen will cease interjecting.

Mr Hunt interjecting—

The Minister for the Environment will cease interjecting.

Mr Husic interjecting—

The member for Chifley is delaying proceedings.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, a point of order on direct relevance: the question was not about their foreign investment changes.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister is in order. The minister has the call. The minister is on the same policy topic.

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade and Investment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Another confused comment from the other side of the parliament! The second principle we will apply in assessing the material that is being put forward today is that we will reject it if it contravenes the firm commitments we have made in this free trade agreement. That is the answer to your question. What we are seeing from those opposite, which we are happy to entertain and to look at, is the question of whether we can provide any more clarity or any more comfort around an agreement that is rolled gold and rock solid.