Matt Thistlethwaite (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Financial Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

(1) notes that 29 October 2019 is the 100th anniversary of the International Labour Organization (ILO);

(2) acknowledges that the ILO:

(a) was established following the first world war in an effort to bridge the gap between governments, employers and working people;

(b) was originally an agency of the League of Nations and has continued as a specialised agency to this day where 187 member states work together on improving labour standards and living standards throughout the world; and

(c) is a tripartite organisation that seeks co-operation between governments, employers and workers through the development of policies, standards and programmes that reflect the views of all the representative groups;

(3) recognises:

(a) the historical, cultural and social significance of the ILO over the past 100 years in an Australian context and throughout the world;

(b) that the work of the ILO has played an important role in:

(i) improving incomes, working conditions, safety, equality and protections at work as well as improving productivity and living standards; and

(ii) ending oppressive work practices, removing discrimination and ending child labour; and

(c) that the ILO has passed some of the most important international agreements that reduce exploitation, discrimination and inequality and promote collective bargaining, including the:

(i) Forced Labour Convention of 1930, banning forced or compulsory labour;

(ii) Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention of 1948, providing the right to union organising for collective bargaining;

(iii) Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention of 1949, protection against discrimination for joining a trade union, and taking collective action;

(iv) Equal Remuneration Convention of 1951, providing the right to equal pay removal of gender discrimination;

(v) Discrimination Convention of 1958, providing the right not to be discriminated against on grounds of race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin; and

(vi) Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention of 1999, prohibiting the worst forms of child labour (slavery, prostitution, drug trafficking and other dangerous jobs); and

(4) calls on the Government to adopt a more cooperative approach to workplace relations in the ILO tradition to work with unions and employers to improve Australian’s incomes and living standards.

As this motion states, 29 October this year marks the 100th anniversary of the International Labour Organization. That's a century of advancing social justice and promoting decent work. There's a reason to celebrate, because quite simply the world today is a better place because of the ILO. As a specialised agency of the United Nations, it's been a key force across borders in helping to reduce exploitation, discrimination and inequality, and promote collective bargaining. The organisation was established following the First World War in an effort to bridge the gap between governments, employers and working people.

The ILO rose from the ashes of that disastrous conflict, the war that was meant to end all wars, created in the belief that social justice is essential to universal and lasting peace. Originally an agency of the League of Nations, the ILO has continued as a specialist agency for over a century. Today, 187 member states work together on improving labour standards and developing standards throughout the world. It's a tripartite organisation that seeks cooperation between governments, employers and workers through the development of policy, standards and programs that reflect the views of all representative groups.

The ILO has a rich history of fighting for some of the world's poorest people. It's played an important role in Australia and beyond our shores by improving incomes, working conditions, safety, equality and protections at work, as well as boosting productivity and living standards. The organisation has been a driving force behind reforming oppressive work practices, removing discrimination and, importantly, ending child labour. The ILO has passed some of the most important international agreements that Australia is a signatory to, including the Forced Labour Convention of 1930, banning forced or compulsory labour; the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention of 1948, providing the right to union organising for collective bargaining; the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention of 1949, protecting against discrimination for joining a trade union and taking collective action; the Equal Remuneration Convention of 1951, providing the right to equal pay, and the removal of gender discrimination; the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention of 1958, providing the right not to be discriminated against on the grounds of race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin; and the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention of 1999, prohibiting the worst forms of child labour, notably slavery, prostitution, drug trafficking and other dangerous jobs. Today the work of this wonderful organisation has made a profound transformation. The next century will see globalisation and technological change create even more new paths to prosperity, but so too will existing work arrangements be upended. The disrupters will soon be disrupted.

Climate change, shifting demographics, migration and changes in the organisation of work will affect all societies, including our own. The demand for some jobs will change, while others will disappear or may not resemble what they used to be. The ILO will remain a constant among this certain change. That's why Labor calls on the government to adopt a more cooperative approach to workplace relations in Australia, in the model of the ILO tradition that's been in place for 100 years. That tradition is one of the parties getting together and working together on problems in workplaces throughout the world, ending some of the worst forms of discrimination; introducing equality; boosting the wages, conditions and living standards of workers; and, in doing so, lifting national income and lifting people out of poverty in so many societies throughout the world. It's that tradition, instead of one based on conflict and union bashing, that we call on the government to adopt in their approach to industrial relations. Working with unions and employers can help to improve Australia's incomes and living standards, and I'm very pleased that the member for Cooper, who has had a long involvement with the ILO through her role as the head of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, will be seconding this motion.

David Gillespie (Lyne, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Do we have a seconder for the motion?

Ged Kearney (Cooper, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Skills) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm extraordinarily grateful to the member for Kingsford Smith since he gives me the perfect opportunity to highlight once again for the benefit of the House the stark contrast which exists between some of the best of what has been achieved in protecting workers and the diabolical conduct of the absolute embarrassment which passes for a trade union in the Australian construction sector today.

Banning forced or compulsory labour; prohibiting discrimination on race, gender, religious or political grounds; and working to stop dangerous child labour are critical projects, and doubtless the International Labour Organization has played a valuable and worthwhile role. But, in stark contrast to these admirable achievements, what is today's CFMMEU fighting for? It is the right for workers to walk off the job if the temperature exceeds 28 degrees Celsius and the humidity rises above 75 per cent in South-East Queensland. For the benefit of our southern members, 28 degrees is not a hot day in South-East Queensland. Frankly, I hope the CFMMEU officials who dreamt this up are ashamed of themselves, but I wouldn't hold my breath. There were 13 days last year which would've been lost as a result of these conditions.

So that's what today's CFMMEU is fighting for: nearly an extra three working weeks off for its members, which most workers would be ashamed to take, surely—13 days a year on which our police officers, firefighters, council workers, farmers, and posties will carry on working and contributing to this country while watching our construction workers shirk off for a lie-down in the shade. That is only those construction workers working on a CFMMEU building site.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm a builder, so there you go, shut down. Unfortunately, however, as we know, today's CFMMEU gets much worse than simply proposing unproductive and unfair rules like this. Just a few days ago we saw the latest in a seemingly endless procession of fines imposed on the CFMMEU for unlawful behaviour. No amount of financial penalties, it seems, is enough to make these recidivist law-breakers reconsider their constant contraventions. There's an irony to this motion coming, as it does, in the wake of this latest judgement. The member for Kingsford-Smith asks the House to recognise the ILO's role in promoting freedom of association, while, all over Australia, it's a freedom that the CFMMEU consistently denies to workers in the construction industry. In the most recent case, a CFMMEU official, Kevin Pattinson, defied that right by preventing an electrician and a young apprentice from working on a site at Monash University, because they were not members of the union. As Justice Snaden said:

It is bad enough that it should so casually intrude upon rights of free association so valued by societies of conscience; much worse that it should do so, yet again, in deliberate defiance of the law that it has been told time and time again that it must obey.

I doubt the fines of $69,000 imposed by the court will do anything to stem the tide of CFMMEU law breaking—$16 million of previous fines have not. As Justice Snaden pointed out, there is a 'long list of judicial officers whose exasperated admonitions appear to have been met with studied indifference'.

Victorian state secretary John Setka is reported to have been dismissive of judges who:

… call us criminals [and] all sorts of things [and] fine us millions of dollars [despite having] probably never done a day’s work in their li[ves].

If Mr Setka and his co-conspirators in the CFMMEU do not want their organisation to be called criminal, I would suggest that a simple remedy exists: stop behaving like criminals, learn to obey the laws of the country and get back to work. This week Mr Setka is taking part in the CFMMEU's national conference in Adelaide. I understand he's trying to bring the South Australian branch of the union under his own branch's control. God help the country and God help the currently successful and growing construction industry in South Australia if his empire building is allowed to go on.

Ged Kearney (Cooper, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Skills) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm incredibly pleased to second this motion, and I will not resort to such tripe as the member for Fisher has by denigrating this important anniversary of the International Labour Organization on 29 October. At the Lowy Institute, the Prime Minister said that sovereign nations need to eschew an 'unaccountable internationalist bureaucracy' and the world needs to avoid 'negative globalisation'. He'd be surprised to hear the member for Fisher singing the praises of the ILO, one of those negative, globalist institutionalist bureaucracies. Maybe the Prime Minister needs to listen to the member for Fisher.

It is international globalisation and solidarity that have delivered some of the most significant social protections and advances, over a long period of time. This is true of the ILO, which was formed in 1919. As my friend the member for Kingsford-Smith, who moved this great motion, let us know, it was formed out of the wreckage of the First World War. It then ran smack bang into the turmoil of the Great Depression, fascism and the resulting Second World War. In the midst of that war in 1944, the US and other allies had the foresight to recognise that the ILO would be a key part in building a more prosperous and peaceful world. In 1944, the countries that could gathered together as the ILO issued the Philadelphia declaration. The declaration formed a series of key principles to embody the work of the ILO:

(a) labour is not a commodity;

(b) freedom of expression and of association are essential to sustained

progress;

(c) poverty anywhere constitutes a danger to prosperity everywhere;

(d) the war against want requires … unrelenting vigour—

for the

… promotion of the common welfare.

Over the last 73 years, the governing body of the ILO, the annual International Labour Conference, ILO committees and ILO expert bodies—which I have proudly been a part of—have played a major role in making us think about global standards for workplace rights and safety, fair jobs and social protections. The remarkable thing about the ILO is that it is tripartite—the only United Nations organisation so structured. One half of the votes are the participating nations, one quarter are representatives of employers and one quarter are representatives of workers organisations—unions. This means that, when conventions and recommendations are adopted, they've been carefully worked through to achieve an outcome that most tripartite partners are comfortable with.

The other remarkable thing is that, unlike the mythology about UN organisations, no outcome is imposed on any country. Apart from the core eight conventions, it's up to individual countries themselves to adopt and ratify conventions and their recommendations. However, the foundation of the ILO is a recognition that isolationism by wealthy countries will be to the detriment of every country. That is because unless you lift living standards and workers' entitlements then we all know that poverty and inequality within and between countries will lead to conflict and that low wages and low living standards will see capital and jobs move from one country to another. That is even more true today than it was in 1919 or 1944.

In the modern world, the ILO has an enormous amount of work to do to ensure that we consider and understand the future of work, consider the effects of mass migration of labour and consider the behaviour and responsibilities of transnational corporations. In a world where many of them have bigger budgets than many small countries, it has been the ILO that has done such important work in the last two decades—in Burma, after democracy was restored; in Bangladesh, after Rana Plaza; and in Cambodia. The ILO assists developing countries to build modern regulatory systems, and it would be to our detriment and to the detriment of millions of workers around the world if we did not have these standards.

Many of the problems that face workers today are age-old in nature. To name just a few, there is modern slavery, sex discrimination and lack of social support. I'm honoured to have been part of the ILO process and, in particular, the Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention. I actually pay tribute to the then Liberal IR minister, Eric Abetz, who ensured that it was ratified by Australia. There is the Domestic Workers Convention. There is the Violence and Harassment Convention, which absolutely outlines that employers and workplaces have a role in dealing with family and domestic violence.

Coalition governments over the last six years have not fulsomely funded Australian ILO participation or the work of the ILO. On the occasion of the ILO's 100th anniversary, we should recognise it as one of the most enduring, important and successful of all the United Nations bodies. We should all recommit, in a bipartisan way, to supporting the ILO in its important work and to funding it accordingly. I say today: happy birthday to the ILO, and thank goodness we have it.

Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's a privilege to be able to speak on this motion, because at the heart of this motion is the very aspiration of a nation and a global community to achieve the good ends of a hard day's pay for a hard day's work, of people living with the dignity of work and of being able to build a better world. That's why I'm actually quite happy to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the International Labour Organization. It's an organisation that, despite the protests of the member for Cooper, is built from the idea that countries work together to achieve global ends based on our collective interests.

But we won't be dictated to by those organisations; we will simply do what we can to work together with others when it achieves our ends. Of course, the mover of the motion, the member for Kingsford Smith, particularly called on those in the government to, as he said, stop union bashing. I might remind the member for Kingsford Smith of the traditions and the foundation of the modern Liberal Party. In fact, I have on my phone right here a flyer where the author, Sir Robert Menzies, talked about how we believe in the rights of wage earners and we stand for the best wages and conditions that industry can afford. We stand for incentive payments for increased production and for profit-sharing wherever possible and practical. We stand for the right of unions to express their wishes through the democratic medium of the secret ballot.

Coalition governments have consistently supported the rights of working people. What we have never supported are the interests of trade unions over their members. We have stood by the workers, not by collective centralised interests. The member for Kingsford Smith, if he were honest, would recognise that he should not be calling for the end of union bashing; what he should be calling for is the end of union bashers, particularly where unions bash their members and their interests. That's why the member for Fisher was so prescient in his observations, particularly about the CFMMEU and in the calling out of their conduct and their misbehaviour.

When you think about the ambitions of the International Labour Organization, you think about global aspirations for the type of world that we want to live in—one where people can work, where we're free from discrimination and slavery, where people can go about living their lives freely without coercion. Do you think today that's an aspiration that shared by people like John Setka, with the type of conduct that he has sanctioned and endorsed? Whether they like it or not, the Australian Labor Party, by choice, are joined at the hip with the CFMMEU and their acolytes, and, by that continued relationship, they are ultimately sanctioning and endorsing that type of conduct.

Let's just look at some of the statements that have been made not by me, not by members of the government, but by people of independent courts, like Justice Bromberg from the Federal Court:

The CFMMEU, and in particular the—

Victorian Construction and General—

Divisional Branch, has an appallingly long history of prior contraventions of industrial laws.

  …   …   …

… there is no evidence before me … of any compliance regime ever put in place by the CFMMEU to address its long history of prior contraventions.

And what's the response? Fine after fine after fine for their conduct. Justice Burnett from the Federal Circuit Court said:

The CFMEU, as a holistic organisation, has an extensive history of contraventions dating back to at least 1999. The only reasonable conclusion to be drawn is that the organisation either does not understand or does not care for the legal restrictions on industrial activity imposed by the legislature and the courts.

That is the despicable history of the CFMMEU, amongst many others.

When we look at the 100th anniversary of the ILO and the aspirations that sit behind it, we look to the Australian trade union movement and their political representatives in this place and say: 'How about you aspire to meet the aspirations of the organisation that you want to celebrate on its centenary? Why don't we live up to the aspirations and why don't you sign up to the aspirations of improving living standards, engaging in lawful conduct and making sure we remove slavery and discrimination?' That would be a sincere motion in defence of and advancing the aspirations of the ILO today.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure to rise in support of the motion from the member for Kingsford Smith paying tribute to the International Labour Organization for reaching this incredible milestone of 100 years. It's a pity that the speaker before me didn't actually appreciate the significant role that Australia has played as a founding member state of the ILO and a continuing key partner in the ILO promoting a decent work agenda for people across the globe. Indeed, the cooperation between Australia and the ILO in our region is profound and absolutely worth celebrating. As I said, Australia has been a member of the ILO since it was founded back in 1919.

The ILO was the first specialised agency of the United Nations. It started at the end of World War I with the mission of advancing social justice and human and labour rights by establishing international labour standards. A former ILO director-general has described the primary role of the ILO today as being:

… to promote opportunities for women and men to obtain decent and productive work, in conditions of freedom, equity, security and human dignity.

No matter which part of the world you live in, your ability to get decent, secure work will have an enormous impact on the kind of life you're able to live. It's very easy to take things like the eight-hour working day and minimum wages for granted, but we need to remember that they don't come about by themselves or by accident. They come about through the tireless commitment and hard work of organisations, of bodies, like the ILO. Indeed, the ILO has been at the forefront of defining, defending and enshrining these sorts of right across the globe since its inception. It has a century's worth of achievements in bringing to an end exploitation, standing up to discrimination and addressing inequality. And it's driven some of the most important and wide-ranging international labour agreements and conventions in history. These include the banning of forced and child labour, enshrining the right to organise and the right to equal pay regardless of gender, and protection against discrimination on any grounds, including race, gender, religion, political affiliations or union membership.

The ILO's also worked tirelessly to address specific issues of worker exploitation on the ground. I was very fortunate to be part of a parliamentary delegation recently to Doha in Qatar. I was very pleased to meet with the head of Qatar's International Labour Organization Project Office there. We discussed the ILO's work on the ground and the really groundbreaking reforms they were embarking on in Qatar to protect the rights of migrant workers, including the freedom to change jobs, the removal of exit permits and a non-discriminatory minimum wage. Given that 90 per cent of the population in Qatar are migrant workers, these changes are profoundly important, and I am very pleased that Qatar's Council of Ministers has now formally endorsed these reforms and that they will come into force in January of next year.

All of this has been achieved through a very unique tripartite governing structure. Here representatives from government, employers and workers work together to debate and develop these important labour standards. The ILO has demonstrated time and time again that this is a fantastic model that works well. But of course it takes genuine commitment from all sides to be negotiating in good faith. This government could learn a lot from this model. Too many times we've seen this government take an actively aggressive position when it comes to workers' rights—we've just heard the rhetoric in the speakers before. Indeed, the only thing that seems to energise those opposite is attacking organisations that are there to protect workers and fight for better conditions.

While the government has left energy policy to languish and hasn't attempted to solve issues like homelessness and poverty, it has devoted an incredible amount of time to policies designed to tear down unions and slash workers' pay and conditions. We all know what that's led to: record profits and flat-lining wages, which, in turn, have driven widespread inequality, a hollowing out of the middle class and dangerously flagging growth. I urge this government to look at the evidence, listen to the experts and start a genuine engagement with workers and the organisations that represent them.

Keith Pitt (Hinkler, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll congratulate the International Labour Organization on its 100th anniversary, because what all of us know in this place is that to achieve 100 years in terms of longevity is incredibly difficult, whether it's you as a human, whether it's a business or an organisation, or whether it's something like the International Labour Organization, and congratulations should be given where it is due.

The ILO's decent work agenda helps to advance the economic and working conditions that give all workers, employers and governments a stake in lasting peace, prosperity and progress. But there is an incredible difference between the ILO and the current Australian Labor Party, I have to say. Quite simply, the Australian Labor Party has abandoned workers in this country. They do not represent working people anymore, and I'll expand on that as in the next few minutes.

Where do they come from? According to the ABS Characteristics of Employment in August of 2018, of the 10½ million employees, who were surveyed in August 2018, 15 per cent reported being a member of a trade union associated with their main job—so roughly 1½ million members. Where have they come from? In 1976, there were 2½ million members. I think if we want to compare and contrast the 1976 ALP with the current one, we need to look at the change in population. In 1976, there were just 14 million Australians. There are now 25 million. That is an incredible change, over four decades, as to who was actually representing working people. Why is it so? Quite simply, the decisions made by Labor governments, whether they be state or federal, have not been in the interests of people who are out there working hard for a living, who are putting on their steel cap boots and their high-vis shirts and their working helmets and construction gear and going out there and earning a living. These are individuals who are proud of what they do; they're proud of their job and they're proud of their industry, and they have every right to be so.

For some examples we only need to look at the true Premier of Queensland, Jackie Trad, who said to the entire resources industry, 'You need to transition out of your industry into another job.' This was to an industry that provides over $200 billion of GDP for Australia and over 200,000 jobs. And in some places generations of one family have worked in that industry—three, four or five generations, all the way back to when the first coal was actually shipped from here to India in the 1800s! It might have been earlier than that, but it was substantially a long time ago.

So the Australian Labor Party no longer represents working people at all. If we look at the sugar industry: what they've done now in Queensland is extend what they called the reef regulations into my region. These are the reef regulations which have been in place in Far North Queensland, in areas where there is run-off that goes out towards the Great Barrier Reef. But what we know, and what's been put up by scientists, is that my area of the catchment simply doesn't go into the reef. So they have put another layer of legislation and bureaucracy over those hardworking individuals who are on farms, whether they are members of unions or not, for a regulation which makes absolutely no difference to the outcome for the Great Barrier Reef.

If we look at vegetation laws, it's exactly the same. There is no greater renewable industry than the timber industry. It is the useful product which grows over a period of time and which can be replaced. It's been a very important industry right across Australia for a substantial amount of time and yet we have Labor governments continuing to put those people out of work.

So once again we can look at what Australia Labor says compared to what it does. It is not about working people. That's because it wants to take away their jobs and their right to earn; the ability for them to pay for themselves and their families to educate their kids, to put food on the table and to pay for their own housing. I just think it's abhorrent where the Labor Party has ended up over this period of time. Unfortunately, it now represents some kind of inner-city trend which is the slogan of the day. This morning we saw the announcement of a climate emergency. It was so important to the Australian Labor Party that there were six of them in the chamber—just six! That is sloganeering at its absolute worst.

We can look at what happened in Queensland with the Paradise Dam. What a debacle! The Australian Labor Party and the Queensland Labor government have tried to spin their way out of this. The first thing was that it was free water for drought-stricken farmers. The next one was that it was an inquiry into emergency management procedures for downriver communities. The latest one is, 'We've filled the weir at the Gregory River,' which supplies the townships of Woodgate and Childers. Now of course we have an unspecified safety issue. The reality is that the loss of that water is the loss of wealth in my community; it is the loss of future jobs. It is something that the Australian Labor Party should be standing up for and delivering opportunities for those individuals, whether they live in the cities or in the regions. Unfortunately, they have absolutely lost their way.

Debate adjourned.

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Sitting suspended from 17 : 18 to 17 : 31