Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

There is always the question that you should research and know the answer to before you deal in that confected tone. In respect of conscientious objection, I take you back a fraction, to around 2002, when it was not Labor that broke the 40 years of agreement over conscientious objection; it was in fact the opposition. They changed the way it would be dealt with and introduced it as a separate term within the right of entry provisions. I remember that occurring, and at the time there was a suggestion that there were some reasons behind why the Liberals wanted to do that. I did not believe that, quite frankly. Some people suggested that there had been donations and all sorts of things, but I rejected that out of hand as not being something the Liberals would have entertained. It does, though, beg the question—and perhaps as to during the evening you can remind me—as to why it was put in the right of entry provisions in 2002 in the legislation and broke what you might call the long history of conscientious objection provisions being in there.

What we have is still reflected in the ability to have other certificates so the conscientious objection, as a more general provision—if I could use that shorthand expression—continues on in this legislation and others. What it does not do is continue on in the right of entry provisions under the new Fair Work Bill—and quite rightly so, when that long history was broken not by Labor but by the Liberals.