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

Thank you, Mr Temporary Chairman. The interesting thing is, I will use the word ‘corruption’ in relation to these practices. The reason I use the term ‘corruption’ is that the matters outlined by Senator Williams clearly amount to corruption. The minister has not sought to deny that this has, in fact, occurred. We all know that these kickbacks occur. Sure, there might be some legal definition in the Transport Workers Union lexicon that does not make it corruption, that it is just deals among mates. But amongst humble suburban lawyers like me and people that represent the bush so exceptionally well, as Senator Williams does, we know that by the word ‘corruption’.

Let me just go through some of the situations that occur in New South Wales. If this amendment is passed, we will potentially have the Mutual Responsibility for Road Safety (State) Award in all jurisdictions. The consequences of that are that the Transport Workers Union will have the power to enter a workplace even if the company is not affiliated with the union. Union delegates will be free to inspect driving records and to order companies to provide documents as far back as six years. The award forces employees to complete a safety awareness program to obtain this blue card, with the company responsible—surprisingly—for paying all the costs. It is not the driver or anybody else; it is the company that pays for the blue card. As Senator Williams outlined, the company that provides the blue card is affiliated with the union and, of course, the union is affiliated with the Australian Labor Party. Would the money trail be headed that way? Well, methinks so, but let us wait and see.

Employers will be forced to enrol their employees in the union in order to avoid the burden of union inspections in compliance with the award. People in the transport sector are telling us that the government is being told it risks making the road a more dangerous place if it imposes the New South Wales model nationwide. That is how serious this issue is. Keep aside the corruption aspect so well articulated by Senator Williams; you may or may not believe in that. But it is also an issue of road safety. Why do we say that? Because:

The Award specifically prohibits employers from taking disciplinary action in response to drug or alcohol abuse …

Under the Award, employers must invest in counselling, treatment or rehabilitation but cannot take disciplinary action.

Driver remuneration must also be publicly released under the guise of a ‘safe driving plan’—

which employers and people like us oppose on privacy grounds. Can somebody explain to me whether somebody sitting behind the wheel of a truck is somehow more roadworthy if he earns $X per hour or $X+2 per hour? I thought we had a safety net under which people could not be paid—there would be award minima. So why would we need this public disclosure of payments? Do you know why? So the union has more power to influence the running of these businesses. The Queensland Transport Association believes it will inflict even more red tape. It really is, as NatRoads said, an industrial instrument that is ‘a legal mechanism to feather the nest of the Transport Workers Union’.

I could go on at some length; I will not. We as a coalition are very serious in relation to this aspect of these amendments. Usually I ask my colleagues on the crossbenches for an indication as to how they may vote, but on this occasion we feel that strongly that we will be dividing the chamber irrespective of support from the crossbenchers. Having said that, I would appeal to my brothers, Senator Fielding and Senator Xenophon in particular, to considering voting with us.