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

What we are looking at, of course, is entry for discussion purposes. It currently only requires that there are eligible employees in the workplace. These amendments would therefore be more restrictive than Work Choices; there is no argument about that. They add a layer of complexity that does not exist in either Work Choices or the Forward with Fairness bill. Any measure which requires majority support in the workplace before a union could enter to talk to employees would result in minority groups of employees being disenfranchised and would be likely to breach international obligations in relation to freedom of association.

The government cannot support this amendment. It is about a proposal to allow employees to decide—the opposition says democratically—if they want a union representative to meet with them in the workplace, and which union that ought to be, before entry can occur. I am not sure what motivates the opposition to think that they can add their own style of democracy to this provision. It is much easier to allow the provision as it stands, and as it continued on, to be the relevant provision—that is, you can have entry for discussion but you have to give 24-hours notice. That is sensible. It is sensible to ensure that the current provision is reflected, which is what the Fair Work Bill contains.