Derryn Hinch (Victoria, Derryn Hinch's Justice Party) Share this | Hansard source

I cannot support the Treasury Laws Amendment (Working Holiday Maker Employer Register) Bill 2017, which has Senator Leyonhjelm's fingerprints all over it. I sat in my office with the mother of a backpacker murdered in Queensland who had been exploited and treated very shabbily by unscrupulous farm and orchard employers. Her story, her plight, does not directly connect to this bill, but her mother recounted stories to me from other backpackers who desperately need the physical and financial protections that this public register partially provides. Taking it private, making it confidential, would be, in my mind, a travesty.

Earlier this year, I met up with Englishwoman Rosie Ayliffe, the heartbroken mother of Mia Ayliffe. In August 2016, while working her required 88 days on a farm in North Queensland, Mia was stabbed to death while sleeping in her bed, murdered by another worker with a history of mental instability. The employer had locked the gates of the compound where she was staying, meaning that, even if she'd tried to escape, she would not have been able to. I know that this bill would not have prevented Mia's death, but it would have enabled her to know that she was going to a registered and reputable employer.

Then there's the case of Natalie. In 2013, after completing her time as an au pair, she decided to stay a little longer in Australia. That was when 'au pair' wasn't a dirty word. In order to qualify for her second visa, she had to complete those 88 days of farm work. She went on Gumtree and found a sheep farmer advertising a role for his farm on Kangaroo Island. She contacted him directly, searched him on Facebook, searched the company on Facebook and found nothing suspicious. He told her he had other people working there, including other backpackers, and that he had a partner.

Natalie flew in to Tasmania late at night from Adelaide and he picked her up. He was drunk. After swerving all the way home they arrived at the farm, 20 kilometres away from the nearest town, only for Natalie to find out there was nobody else there, not a single other soul except the drunk employer and her. She was isolated with no phone service and no wi-fi. He had a code on his landline so she couldn't dial out. For the next 15 days she was subjected to verbal abuse and the farmer slaughtered lambs in front of her because 'That's what I do when I'm angry.' Luckily, Natalie has an IT background. She was eventually able to hack into his wi-fi, call the police and get off the island. Not remarkably, this farmer was already known to police.

I know that vulnerable employees are having their 88 days drawn out. They are sent to work and stay in hostels, which they have to pay for, often owned by the employer. They are told that work will be coming up very soon. Sometimes those 88 days have been drawn out for as long as six months. And they are paying for it. I have heard how female backpackers have got suspicious because the pretty ones were getting work and the less attractive ones were not. I have heard of girls being told they must have sexual relations with the employer if they want him to sign off on, to verify, the 88 days. That is disgusting.

That's why I cannot support this attempt to lessen protections for workers and not enhance them. The public register gives some protection—not a lot, but some—to workers. This retrograde bill will certainly not.