Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

In the time that's left to me—last evening I had some things to say about both the Treasury Laws Amendment (Prohibiting Energy Market Misconduct) Bill 2019, and the character of the government's failed approach to energy policy. I'd just say this afternoon that Labor's support for the bill is conditional on the improvements that will be the subject of amendments in this place to prevent the partial privatisation of energy assets. We know from decades of experience that public services and assets don't get better after privatisation, they get worse. One of the principal drivers of the sustained rises in energy prices over the course of the last couple of decades has been a failed approach to energy privatisation. It hurts communities and families and it spells job losses—particularly in regional communities and in good, quality jobs—a decline in the quality of services, higher prices and knock-on effects for local economies.

The Senate inquiry into this bill heard evidence that, unless a government owned corporation is in genuine competition with another government owned corporation, the country risks privatisation occurring in the event of divestment. The Queensland government raised similar concerns to the inquiry, with their submission setting out three different ways that the bill in its current form allows possible privatisation to occur. The first one is the situation set out by Dr Emerson, where a divestiture order could force a government owned electricity generator to be divested to a private corporation due to government entities not being in direct competition with one another. The second pathway allows for state governments to elect to proceed with privatisation in the case of a divestiture order. Thirdly, organisations that are not state authorities but which hold public assets would be able to divest to private companies. In the case of Queensland, Energex and Ergon Energy are both subsidiaries of government owned corporations that currently hold public assets.

It's unacceptable to Labor for this bill to contain any provision that clears a pathway to privatisation of government owned electricity generators. Our amendments to the bill remove those loopholes and protect against the privatisation of national or state assets in electricity. This is the only way that Labor will support the passage of the bill. There needs to be zero prospect of any state owned asset being privatised if it's forcibly divested.

Secondly, Labor has moved additional amendments because we're concerned that the bill in its current form puts workers at risk, in the event of divestment, of losing their protections and entitlements under the Fair Work Act. The transfer-of-business provisions under the Fair Work Act are designed to protect workers when a business changes hands from one company to another. This acknowledges that, when an employer buys or sells a business, the sale may affect the employment and entitlements of the employees already working for the business and seeks to make this transfer as fair as possible.

Under the transfer-of-business provisions, workplace instruments that covered employees of the old employer continue to cover those employees employed by the new employer, which means that workers can transfer across on their existing award or collective agreement entitlements and be assured that their pay and conditions and, critically, their redundancy pay that they rely upon for security and to live and feed their families will be the same when the business changes hands. This transfer of entitlements and protections only comes into effect if a connection exists between the two employers.

That's why we're moving this amendment—to ensure that workers affected by divestment have all the protections they deserve under the Fair Work Act. We will always act in the interests of workers' rights, workers' wages and workers' job security, and we will only proceed with this bill on that basis. Labor will support the bill on the basis that the privatisation amendment and the workers' rights amendment are adopted. We're pleased to see that the government has adopted these provisions.

I will take the opportunity to say that we're very sceptical about the broader benefits of this legislation. What really needs to occur in this country is for the people in decision-making positions in the government to approach the issue of energy policy with some moral seriousness. They are responsible for the administration of energy policy at the Commonwealth level and through the COAG mechanisms. They have a responsibility to ensure a future for the energy sector, with more renewable energy, not less, with more energy security, not less, and with lower prices for consumers and businesses. That means government need to adopt a serious energy policy for the future of the country, something that this gang over here has so far refused to do.