Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation) Share this | Hansard source

Can I say that, in general terms at least, Family First takes a very considered approach to matters of industrial relations, unlike those on the other side. When Family First raises an issue such as this, I am prepared and the government are prepared to look at it and consider what the outcomes may be in relation to our legislation. We have never said that our legislation is perfect. We have always said that we are willing to finetune it and consider any changes that might need to be made. That is why we moved amendments to our legislation before it was enacted and after it was enacted. As a government we have a great record of listening to the needs of the community and we will continue to listen and will continue to see what is required to ensure that we get the balance right in relation to our industrial relations system. Clearly, what we had in the past was a system that was so overregulated that there was a huge disincentive to employment. The latest figures brought out today indicate that our deregulation has allowed literally hundreds of thousands of Australians, who in the past would not have had the benefit of employment, to gain employment.

I note with some interest that the people of France have made a decision overwhelmingly supporting a presidential candidate who is committed to the deregulation of the labour market. The interesting thing is that, whilst we were debating Work Choices, the two examples that I continually used of overregulated labour markets and which those over there championed were in fact France and Germany, with high unemployment rates. The French people themselves have now acknowledged the need for deregulation. I simply say to those opposite in particular that, with our current regime, we are still more regulated than the UK labour system, under Tony Blair, and we are still more regulated than the labour system in New Zealand, under Helen Clark, a Labour Prime Minister. What it shows is that we are willing to take a sensible, balanced approach, and that is exactly what we will do when we consider the full impact of the decision to which the honourable senator refers.