Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

I just want to give a very quick potted version of the history of the Safe Work Australia Bill 2008 thus far. I think everybody in this chamber supports the concept of a national OH&S system. This legislation was put forward to the Senate, and the Senate made some amendments to that legislation. Those amendments have now been to the House, and the Labor government is arrogantly refusing to consider even one of the amendments that were carried by the Senate. The legislation is based on an intergovernmental agreement between the Commonwealth, the states and the territories. Therefore, I think the government can quite reasonably assert that amendments that may run counter to that intergovernmental agreement are causing them some difficulty. I think that is a reasonable proposition for them to put. However, there are a lot of other amendments that in no way, shape or form impact on the intergovernmental agreement, yet each one of those amendments has also been arrogantly rejected by the government.

I can indicate to the Senate that in a spirit of cooperation, and in acknowledgment that there is an intergovernmental agreement at stake here, my friend and colleague the Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, Michael Keenan, the member for Stirling, wrote to Ms Gillard, the minister, on 12 November 2008. He said in his letter: ‘I am writing to inform you that I am very happy to sit down with you and discuss a way forward through this impasse.’ That letter was on 12 November—some three weeks ago. Mr Keenan’s office received a very arrogant phone call indicating that the minister was not interested in any discussions whatsoever.

It is interesting to note that the overwhelming majority, if not all, of the amendments that the Senate carried had the support of a majority of senators, including the coalition and also the Greens, Senator Xenophon and Senator Fielding. On top of that, they had the support of the ACTU and the ACCI. So we had a coalition—beyond the normal coalition that we refer to in this place—between the Liberal and National parties, the Greens, Senator Xenophon and Family First, and then we had a marriage, even, between the ACTU and ACCI. Yet Minister Gillard so very arrogantly says that they have got all of it wrong. ‘They have absolutely all of it wrong,’ she says, ‘and we will not consider even one of their amendments as being worthy.’ And, what is more, this came after we put out the palm branch to them and said, ‘Let’s have a discussion to see if we can compromise’—which we did three weeks ago. The minister has simply replied that the government is not interested in even having a sensible discussion to see if there is a way forward.

In these circumstances we, as an opposition, will be voting against the motion that is before the Senate. In circumstances where the minister is arrogantly unwilling to engage in any sensible discussion in relation to a way forward without those reasons, proposals, suggestions and rationale being put forward to us, there is no reason, I believe, why this Senate should back down on its proposals. Where some of the Senate’s amendments did, in fact, offend against the intergovernmental agreement, they might possibly be areas that could be revisited. But all those other amendments that did not so offend should continue to be pursued. That is a personal point of view. But the problem is that we cannot even have that discussion with Minister Gillard because she is so arrogant, so full of her own self-importance and so unwilling to discuss with anybody—