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

Given the minister’s response, let us go through this in some considerable detail. Proposed section 137B(1) says, amongst other things:

(1)

In considering whether to make an order under subsection 137A(1) in relation to a particular workplace group, FWA must have regard to—

a number of things, including—

(b)

the wishes of the members of the workplace group …

Where on earth does it say in that section that Fair Work Australia must have regard to the wishes of the employer? It does not say that anywhere. What it does say is that Fair Work Australia may have regard to ‘the consequences of not making the order for any employer, employees or organisation concerned’. But that does not mean that they need to take the wishes of the employer into account. If that is what subsection (e) means, why do you need the specific subsection (b), which says that Fair Work Australia ‘must have regard to the wishes of the members of the workplace group’?

If this is going to be dealt with equitably, you would then be saying the opposition amendment is not needed but that you will delete subsection (b). We say it does make good sense to take into account the wishes of the members of the workplace group, and to specifically state that, but we also say it makes good sense to specifically state that the wishes of the employer of that particular workplace group should be taken into account as well. With great respect, Minister, what you are asserting is not in the legislation. Can I say to Senator Xenophon that the belt he has been told about by the government is fraying and I am not sure it is going to be doing the job that he was told it would do.