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

The Leader of the Government in the Senate foolishly interjects, forgetting completely that Ms Gillard’s proposals to this place had numerous breaches of Forward with Fairness in them. Indeed, she through her colleague introduced 50 pages of amendments to her own legislation. It seems that size really does matter for Ms Gillard—not in relation to the size of a small business but in relation to the size of her ego and her pride.

Senator Fielding is the architect of allowing that to go on unabated. I say to Senator Fielding that the very plight of job creation in this country and the very plight of small business that he was championing at 2.30 this morning is still the same plight that small business and Australian workers face at 4.50 pm this same day. Nothing has changed other than Senator Fielding’s resolve to defend job creation in Australia and small business.

We as a coalition said at all times that we would measure these provisions on a three-way test: what they did for small business; what they did for jobs; and whether they would mean excessive trade union power. Clearly, the diminution of the number impacts on jobs and small business. But let us do away with this nonsense of the mandate—the mandate is looking very shabby when the government itself moves amendments to its own legislation so that it can countermand its own policies, which it has done on numerous occasions. It made good sense when they did so, but they cannot cherry-pick the mandate argument when and as it suits them.

Let us move to the other issue, which is the fifth amendment or the second issue. That relates to independent contractors. Ms Gillard and the Labor Party were willing to hold up the complete repeal of Work Choices on the basis that the Senate wisely made an amendment making it unlawful to include in an enterprise agreement, amongst other things, items that had placed restrictions on the use of independent contractors. A great protection for independent contractors was introduced through this Senate into the legislation. I am yet to see the letter and I am yet to see whether independent contractors have been sold out as well. No mandate argument on that; they did not even take the issue of independent contractors in that regard to the election.

Nor did they in relation to the sixth amendment and the third issue, which related simply to the definition of enterprise level. We said to make it perfectly clear the legislation should say enterprise level or workplace level. And the minister at the table said that there was no need for that because enterprise level included workplace level. So we said, ‘So if the worst is that we are putting belts and braces on this, we will keep on with it.’ And now all of a sudden this amendment, because of Ms Gillard’s pride, should stand in the way of the repeal of Work Choices. Those that campaigned against Work Choices would be shaking their heads this evening at the evening news if they were to hear that Ms Gillard’s silly pride has stood in the way of the complete rollback of Work Choices. Instead, we had a situation of Senator Fielding and Senator Xenophon agreeing and repudiating the arguments they put in this place less than 24 hours ago in relation to some of the issues. I said Senator Xenophon—I withdraw that; I should say Senator Fielding only. I apologise for that. I was looking in that direction and I apologise to Senator Xenophon.

One of the other great ironies of this debate was when we dealt with the issue of superannuation. Senator Sherry banged on in this place about the evil of secret deals; that there was a need for transparency. When we amended this legislation in this place, in full vision of the Australian people, bouncing ideas off each other, in the full and in the open, the government rejected it. They then go behind closed doors, do a deal, the full details of which we will never know, and come back and say that this is allegedly the will of the Australian people.

If it was such a good deal, why could it not have been struck in the Australian Senate by Australian senators during the debate on this legislation? Why did the government and Senator Fielding have to go behind closed doors to make such a deal? I say to the Australian people that the compromise that the Senate achieved last night was one of the best moments in the Senate’s history, dealing with a complicated and divisive issue. Instead, Senator Fielding has done a deal behind the scenes to undo that compromise, the full details of which we will never know.

I will not delay the Senate for long, other than to say that we measured these amendments and this legislation on three criteria: impact on jobs, impact on small business and impact on increased trade union power. We believed that the compromise, which meant a lot of compromise right around the chamber, had struck the right deal. That is why, as the champions of job creation and as the champions of small business in this country, we will be insisting on the very wise amendments that the Senate made last night.

But for Senator Fielding, the Deputy Prime Minister, Ms Gillard, would have so overcooked the egg by her arrogance, so overacted in relation to this matter, that she would have been in very real danger of losing her audience, the Australian people. She knew it, and that is why the government were so desperate to strike a deal. That is what they did. That is why they caved in. Senator Fielding will now get a headline other than alcopops. Good luck to him.

But when we leave this place tonight, every single coalition senator will know that he and she voted for jobs and small business, knowing that small business is the engine room of jobs in this country. We will be able to leave this place and say at the next election that we defended jobs and small business with pride and with commitment. When it comes to these issues in the future, there is only one group of senators that will defend them—that is, the coalition, the Liberal and National parties. We unashamedly support the amendments carried by the Senate less than 24 hours ago.