Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility) Share this | Hansard source

I am sure the minister does not want a history lesson on which party first introduced enterprise bargaining into Australia. I make three points. The first is that by opposing this amendment the government has made it very clear that it believes Australian employees should not be fully compensated for the trading away of protected award conditions. The second point is in relation to the sole parent issue. I am not sure what point the minister is trying to make there; are we really suggesting that someone’s worth at work should be determined by their personal circumstances and that somehow, for example, the sole parent in that situation could have to give away more to get that provision because that is worth more to her or him than somebody who did not require the time to pick their children up from school? This is the problem with the way in which you are approaching this. The third point relates to the minister’s comments about semantics. This is from a government that says, in television ads, newspaper ads and a booklet, ‘protected by law’ in relation to conditions that can be traded away. So do not come in here, Minister, and lecture us on semantics.

Question put:

That the amendments (Senator Wong’s) be agreed to.