Senate debates

Tuesday, 27 November 2012

Bills

Fair Work Amendment Bill 2012; In Committee

9:25 pm

Photo of Eric AbetzEric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Hansard source

The Fair Work Amendment Bill 2012 coalition senators' dissenting report. The senator at the table took such a keen interest she could not even get past the first sentence, which reads:

1.1 Coalition senators are highly disappointed that once again, the Government has rushed through the Committee a significant Bill that will affect each employer, employee and independent contractor in Australia without the Committee being able to conduct fulsome inquiries.

That was the concern expressed by coalition senators that had to deal with this about a week ago. It is still our concern. So be assured that that has been an exceptionally consistent approach.

The explanatory memorandum this bill tells the hapless parliamentarians who do not look at these things in detail, who do not have the benefit of a proper parliamentary debate, who do not have the benefit of a proper committee system, that this bill is to be cost neutral. It is going to be cost neutral, but we do not know what the cost is going to be. No wonder this is a government that has its budgets blow out in every single area of its endeavours. It is cost neutral, but we do not know what the cost will be. Isn't that a great way to run the country? Isn't that a great way to run the finances?

Unfortunately, this is just another—albeit relatively small—example. But do you know what? All these $1½ millions here and $1½ millions there actually add up to the tens of billions, and now over $100 billion, that this country is in debt for. But we will not get an answer to it. It was taken on notice at the Senate committee hearing, and here we are a week later, still without the relevant information. Yet again it reflects on this government.

Can I ask the minister: in relation to the review of the Fair Work Act, why did the minister and the minister's office decide to change the terms of reference as recommended by the department?

Comments

No comments