Nick Xenophon (SA, Nick Xenophon Team) Share this | Hansard source

Sarcastic, rude; you are not advancing this debate.

I supported for many years and continue to support industrial manslaughter laws, because if an employer puts a worker's life at risk and that worker's life is lost then the chain of responsibility needs to go to the very top of management. What I have done in the South Australian parliament is a matter of fact. When it comes to issues of asbestos and safety, in 2005 the South Australian parliament, in a very rare event, passed a private member's bill I introduced to ensure that the workplace compensation mechanisms for asbestos victims and their families were overhauled. They were radical changes that both Labor and the Liberal opposition supported at that time. They were real changes that have helped many hundreds of asbestos victims in South Australia and are still in place.

I want to go to the issue of the code. The 2016 code contains a workplace health and safety conduct clause, but Labor's 2013 code was silent on this issue. The 2016 code mandates compliance with safety laws and sets specific requirements for asbestos training and safety, but Labor's code was silent on these issues. The 2016 code contains penalties for not complying with workplace health and safety laws, but Labor's code was silent on this issue. The 2016 code requires tenderers to demonstrate past compliance with workplace health and safety laws, but Labor's code was silent on this issue. The 2016 code prevents work going to companies that have breached workplace health and safety laws, but Labor's code was silent on this issue. The 2016 code prevents head contractors from using subcontractors who have breached workplace health and safety laws, but Labor's code was silent on this issue. That is a matter of fact.

To say that I have betrayed apprentices is again more lies and fearmongering. The code does not prevent or restrict the employment of apprentices. During negotiations with the government, the government agreed to include a legislative note after subsection 11(3)(a) which states that it does not prevent the inclusion of clauses in an enterprise agreement that encourage the employment of apprentices.

These are the sorts of the matters that need to be put in relation to this. So, when Mr Brendan O'Connor in the other place talks about issues of asbestos and safety, those comments are unfounded. They are false. It is part of the post-truth world we now live in.

In 2005, those laws for asbestos compensation were adequately overhauled. In 2004, the industrial manslaughter legislation I introduced into the South Australian parliament was not supported by the major parties, but, interestingly, the Australian Greens in the South Australian parliament picked up on those laws and to their credit they acknowledged the work that I had done a number of years earlier in relation to that. These Commonwealth procurement rules are something that the Labor Party never brought into play when they were in power. They had an opportunity to do the right thing by Australian industry and by Australian workers. As a result of good faith negotiations with the government those rules have now been changed, significantly and substantially. Dare I say, I am sure there are some in the Labor Party and I daresay in the coalition—and Senator Cash is nodding her head—who probably were pretty nervous about these changes brought into play. But these changes are a big deal for Australian jobs and for Australian industry, and I do appreciate the comments of Senator Carr in relation to this.

In terms of foreign workers, Senator Cameron knows that we worked together on a Senate inquiry in 2012 on 457 visas and other visas and called for tighter rules to give preferences to local jobs. The security of payments legislation reforms will make a big difference to many thousands of subcontractors who have been dudded in the past.

In conclusion, we will have a substantial committee stage for this bill. My colleagues and I do not support a gag on debate. This will go on as long as it needs to so that all the questions can be asked—so that everyone can ventilate their point of view. We do not support a gag, in the way that senator Cameron and others did and in the way that the Greens did in previous debates. We are in the grip of post-truth politics, where it is more important to tell the story you want rather than tell the story that the people should know. That is why this legislation is important for making sure that the code does what it is meant to do. What is in it for us? That is a question that was posed by Senator Hanson-Young. It is about the small and medium operators not being pushed around. It is to ensure that we have a strong construction sector they can employ more and more Australians on decent wages and conditions.