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

The Senate is considering the Safe Work Australia Bill 2008 [No. 2]

Ms Gillard has now realised that in that fit of pique, as she stormed out away from the parliament, she could no longer achieve those ends and she is now reintroducing the legislation. I would have thought that that lesson might have invited Ms Gillard to reconsider her position and at least accept one of the amendments moved by the crossbenches and the coalition, just as a sign of good faith that not all wisdom resides only with a government, with Labor.

As I said before, and I will say it again to make the point: when you have the ACTU, ACCI, the Greens, the coalition, Senator Fielding and Senator Xenophon all agreeing on a particular course of action, there is a fair bet there might be a kernel of substance in what is being put forward; there is just a very slight chance. But no; Ms Gillard ‘we know best’ is insisting that this legislation comes before us and will not accept any amendments. One wonders how this has in fact got through the government and Labor’s processes other than, I think, possibly as a need for Labor to give Ms Gillard a bit of confidence boost. She has been humiliated in recent times in relation to her quite outlandish claims on the school funding, Building the Education Revolution, a $1.7 billion shortfall, and she still has yet to explain whether that was a muck-up on her part or whether the program was oversubscribed. We do not know how that occurred. Then, in the other part of her portfolio, employment, we have her huge embarrassment where she continually told the Australian people that there would be no detriment to Australian workers with award modernisation. Just last week the Australian Industrial Relations Commission blew Ms Gillard out of the water on that and has exposed that as a complete misrepresentation—I was about to say a fraud—of what will actually occur to and for Australian workers. She also made that claim to employers, saying that they would not have any extra costs with award modernisation. When we asked that that be put in the legislation, Labor refused because they knew that it was another promise that they could not live up to.

What we have with Ms Gillard is somebody, who has had this fanfare of publicity, all concerned about her image but incapable of dealing with the substance matters of her portfolio. Having been, as I said, humiliated with the aspects of her education revolution—so-called—and award modernisation—so-called—I dare say that certain people in the Labor caucus said, ‘We’ve got to give her a bit of a confidence boost and bring back the safe work legislation.’ We as a coalition have thought long and hard about what we should do with this legislation. Are we still committed to the amendments that we supported last time around? Absolutely. But we are also absolutely committed to ensuring that we have a nationally consistent system in relation to occupational health and safety. What we now know from Ms Gillard is that if she does not get it all her own way, 100 per cent, we will not have a nationally consistent system, because she will simply not countenance any amendments. Sensible though they be, amendments that have the support across the parties, across the industrial divide of employers and unions—despite all that, she says she will not countenance any amendments. So the coalition has to decide whether or not we keep insisting on those amendments or whether we say a nationally consistent scheme should be paramount.

We have come to the reluctant conclusion that getting a national scheme underway should be the paramount consideration, but it reflects very poorly on Labor that they do business in such an arrogant way, willing to put the nationally consistent system on hold subject to them getting absolutely everything. Can I just remind the Senate of some of the amendments that we supported in relation to the number of people on the committee and who should be represented on the committee. I would have thought that there was not much opposition to the ACTU nominating somebody who would represent the workers’ interests. But the minister will not countenance even that because she and the government want to personally appoint their people. So if the ACTU or ACCI were to put forward people not to Ms Gillard’s liking, she can simply refuse them. This is the arrogance of Labor that is now no longer oozing but gushing out everywhere in relation to their entire decision making on the future of this country. It is not about good, sound policy. It is not about evidence based policy that we heard so much about during the election campaign. It is all about having the power to appoint your mates, the ones that might be compliant and the ones who will be told on the side, ‘You do the government’s bidding on this and there might be something further for you down the road.’ It is interesting that the minister in this place who has control of it is none other than Senator Arbib, who has just brought his caravan from New South Wales right-wing Labor up here to Canberra. All the hallmarks of New South Wales Labor have now been brought into this Senate chamber courtesy of Senator Arbib’s presence.

That is exactly how Labor does business in New South Wales, the discredited government that it is, and those same sorts of tactics and that same sort of inappropriate approach to public policy making have now been brought into Canberra into the Senate courtesy of the New South Wales Labor Party as represented by Senator Arbib. It is not good policy to ignore the wishes of such a broad cross-section of the community. I think that Senator Siewert and I both thought it quite spooky last time we were debating this legislation that we were on a unity ticket in relation to these matters. Senator Siewert and I both had to do a double-take and recheck our views on these matters. But what it shows to Senator Siewert’s supporters and to coalition supporters is that the Greens are not wrong all the time. Most of the time, yes, but not all of the time. For Greens supporters, it shows that sometimes the coalition might get something right as well.

But when Labor, Senator Arbib and the Labor caravan from Sydney—and let us not forget that it was the New South Wales Right that delivered the numbers to allow Mr Rudd to attain the leadership—bring these sorts of practices to Canberra it is a matter of great regret, and Safe Work Australia will be worse off for these amendments not being passed. But it is quite clear that, if these amendments are insisted upon yet again, Labor will withdraw the legislation yet again and we will not have that nationally consistent approach which we when in government were supporting. We were developing it and this is now, if you like, a further evolution of that, something which we support in principle. So our decision is to support the legislation as is, albeit reluctantly, because we believe that the amendments that were passed last time would have enhanced the legislation, but Labor simply cannot see their way clear for purely political reasons that have nothing to do with a benefit to worker safety in Australia. That is the issue I suppose that concerns us as a coalition the most. Worker safety, Safe Work Australia, can all fly out the window because of Ms Gillard’s arrogance and Labor’s determination to ensure that they can appoint whatever hack they want to these various positions without genuine input from the ACTU and the employer representative organisation, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

So whilst the opposition usually says at the end of the second reading speech that we either support the bill or oppose the bill, it is with great reluctance that we support the bill. But I still hope that during the committee stages the government might come to its senses and agree to some of the amendments. It is not over until the final vote but, given the arrogant approach of Ms Gillard, I doubt that there will be a change of heart. But I say to the government: it would be an indication of Labor’s genuineness in this if it were to actually embrace a few of those amendments, especially those amendments which would not impact in any way, shape or form on the COAG agreement in relation to this matter.