Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

The timing of the report that we have proposed—28 April—is, as Senator Murray quite rightly says, a function of the government’s extraordinary lethargy with respect to sittings of the parliament. The first six months of the parliament reflect the laziness of this government and its unwillingness to face Senate scrutiny. If you have a reporting date of 17 March—which I gather the government was originally going to set as 3 March—you will effectively have only two weeks for an inquiry into this bill, and if you report on 17 March you will have just three days to debate the bill before we have a seven-week recess. I suspect that this bill is not going to get through in three days, so inevitably this bill will carry over to the budget sittings. In good faith, the opposition has said to the government: ‘We’re prepared to have a reporting date of 14 April if you, the government, will agree that the Senate will resume in the week of 5 May—that is, the week before the budget. The report can be received and debated, and the legislation can be considered in that week. We are prepared to devote as much time as you like in the week of 5 May to consider this legislation.’

The legislation is not insignificant. The bill runs to 121 pages and the explanatory memorandum runs to 98 pages. This is not idle legislation; this is significant reform of Australia’s industrial relations arrangements. And for all the rhetoric we had from Senator Ludwig about AWAs, this bill introduces the Labor version of an AWA: an individual statutory agreement called an individual transitional employment agreement. This is significant legislation. It will have significant impact on employment, on the economy and on industries all over Australia.

The Senate should properly scrutinise this legislation by conducting, right across this land, inquiries that consider this bill in detail and give everybody an opportunity to comment on significant changes to our industrial relations arrangements which, as I said, allow the Labor Party to introduce its own form of individual statutory agreement. The Senate should properly examine that—examine its impact on the inflation which the government is so concerned about. The Senate should examine its impact on employment and on our great mining industries in Senator Murray’s state of Western Australia, which are genuinely concerned about what Labor proposes to do with individual statutory agreements. It is worthy of proper examination.

Of course, governments will always try to have short inquiries. I am not going to pretend that we did not, but we are now the opposition and other non-government parties in the Senate ought to hold this government to account for the proper scrutiny of its legislation. Therefore the coalition, in good faith, have said that we are prepared to compromise. We are prepared to bring it forward. If there were more sitting weeks we could have a more relevant and probably earlier reporting date, but if the government stick to 17 March the Greens say that we have effectively two weeks only, because there is a week of estimates next week, two clear weeks and then the Senate resumes. The Greens are saying that they are prepared to join with Labor in having a two-week inquiry into, as I just said, a bill of over 100 pages and an explanatory memorandum of about 100 pages. This bill demands greater scrutiny than that, and the opposition, in good faith, offer 14 April. If that is rejected then we believe the appropriate reporting date is the 28th, allowing this bill to be considered in the budget week. As I said, our offer still stands. We are here ready, willing and able to return to this parliament on 5 May if the government wishes.

Question put:

That the amendment (Senator Ludwig’s) be agreed to.