Chris Ellison (WA, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

At the request of Senator Abetz, I move:

That, upon its introduction into the House of Representatives, the provisions of the Workplace Relations Amendment (Transition to Forward with Fairness) Bill 2008 be referred to the Education, Employment and Workplace Relations Committee for inquiry and report by 28 April 2008, with particular reference to:

(a)

economic and social impacts from the abolition of individual statutory agreements;

(b)

impact on employment;

(c)

potential for a wages breakout and increased inflationary pressures;

(d)

potential for increased industrial disputation;

(e)

impact on sectors heavily reliant on individual statutory agreements; and

(f)

impact on productivity.

This is a reference to the Senate Standing Committee on Education, Employment and Workplace Relations of the Workplace Relations Amendment (Transition to Forward with Fairness) Bill 2008. It is an extremely important bill and one which needs adequate time for scrutiny. We have had a good deal of debate today about the necessity of scrutiny by the Senate and the use of legislative standing committees, and this is what this motion does. We have had those ad hoc issues referred to select committees. This is a bill going to a Senate legislation standing committee—and quite rightly so. But the issue at hand is the length of time of scrutiny for this committee. The reporting date in the motion is 28 April. That gives the Senate committee adequate time over the break to travel Australia and to engage those people who have an interest in this area, which is vital to all Australians and, indeed, was one of the major issues in the last election.

The government proposed an earlier reporting date around mid-March. Of course, in between, we have estimates committees sitting and other sitting weeks. It is the view of the coalition that more time is needed for such an important bill. This is something which needs to be considered carefully and, as indicated in the terms of reference—which, whilst general, also refer to some specific areas—is vital to this country and, of course, the scrutiny that goes with it is essential. Many Australians have concerns, one way or another, about this legislation. As I said, it was a major issue in the last election. It is therefore imperative that we have that time within which to report. And might I say that the government’s proposal would have seen this come back in the second sitting week in March, as I recall, and it would have left just three days—just three days—to pass what is a very important bill before that lengthy break in April. So the government was giving us a short period for scrutiny by the committee and an even shorter time for debate in the Senate. Previously we made an offer to the government to bring the date forward and also have an extra sitting week, but the government has rejected that. So we have reverted to the original notice of motion which has a reporting date of 28 April and which will provide adequate time for debate in the May and June sitting weeks in the Senate. I commend this motion to the Senate.