Sue Lines (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of answers given today by Senator Abetz on behalf of the Abbott government. I have got to say that Australian workers are not fooled by the lies of the Abbott government. They are not fooled.

I want to look at the guarantees that the Abbott government gave to Australian workers—both in their platform and in the particular guarantee that Senator Abetz gave to a worker who took the time and the trouble to write to him. I have to say that I was really disgusted today to hear the disrespectful way that Senator Abetz treated the questions from Labor on behalf of that worker. It showed the government's real, true colours in that they do not really respect Australian workers and they clearly do not respect the role of trade unions.

Let me go to the Abbott government's policy document. When in opposition the coalition put out the coalition's policy to improve the Fair Work laws. There are no changes to the Fair Entitlements Guarantee anywhere in that policy document. In fact, I will quote from page 11 of that document. It says:

The details of the Coalition’s Policy to Improve the Fair Work Laws are spelled out clearly in this document. Based on the laws as they stand now, the Coalition has no plans to make any other changes to the Fair Work laws.

That is their policy document. I think Australians, when they consider who they are voting for, have got a right to expect that a policy document of an opposition who wishes to be a government can be taken at face value—that what it says will actually be the truth. But, because we know Australian workers do not trust the Abbott government, one of the workers—Mr Pierre Raoult, who was referred to today—took it upon himself to write to Senator Abetz personally to seek his own clarification. Senator Abetz, in response to the letter from Mr Raoult, said, 'You can be assured that the coalition would not seek to do anything that would water down these important protections for Australian workers.' Yet we see a watering-down of the Fair Entitlements Guarantee Bill—a watering-down of an uncapped redundancy to a redundancy capped at 16 weeks. That is a broken promise, it is watering down, and it is a lie given to the Australian public by the Abbott government. It is a lie. It is worse than a broken promise; it is a lie. You cannot say one thing in your policy documents and in personal letters to constituents when they write to you and then completely ignore that. So it is a lie by the Abbott government.

Senator Abetz went further. He said to Mr Pierre Raoult, 'We were explicit in the policy'—and I have just clarified that and read that into the Hansard; that is absolutely correct—and 'but for the changes proposed in that document, we would not make any other changes.' That is the guarantee Senator Abetz gave. For the Abbott government to move away from that today is a lie. It is a betrayal of trust. But Senator Abetz went further; he said, 'Accordingly, you can be satisfied that there is no risk to your entitlements.' Senator Abetz can be as cute and as clever as he likes, but this particular worker had genuine concerns about his entitlements.

Senator Abetz can say what he likes today, but the reality is that if the government is successful in prosecuting its changes to the fair entitlements guarantee and this worker's company goes belly-up next year and this worker has a redundancy expectation of greater than 16 weeks, guess what? He will not be getting them. It does not matter how Senator Abetz and the Abbott government want to lie, that is the truth.

Last week at the inquiry we heard evidence about all sorts of things the government is trying to carry on about. The reality is that the idea to reduce the entitlements came from their mates at the National Commission of Audit. We currently have a scheme which guarantees entitlements. It is not a welfare scheme. It is not a minimum scheme. It is a scheme which guarantees entitlements. The Abbott government needs to hold firm to its commitments. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.