Ben Small (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'm glad Senator Polley raises the DNA of the Morrison government, because in our DNA is jobs and more of them for all Australians. Our track record speaks to that, with 1.84 million new placements through the jobactive program since its inception in 2015. But the Morrison government will not rest on its laurels. Indeed, we look at the industrial relations bill before this place now that improves enterprise agreements—delivering on average 40 per cent more into the pockets of hardworking Australians—offers the opportunity to grow jobs, increases freedom and flexibility within the labour market and offers new protections for employees in this place.

Why, then, don't Australians already enjoy those benefits? It is because the Labor Party chooses to obstruct more money in the pockets of hardworking Australians. On the flexibility and freedoms afforded to those in the gig economy, the Labor Party are most focused on racing to the bottom, as usual, and talking about a minimum wage. The Victorian Labor government's inquiry into the gig economy found, on average, the mean wage of a gig economy worker is $32.16, which represents a 62 per cent increase on the Australian minimum wage. The Labor Party would rather that Australians not enjoy 62 per cent extra earning capacity because of their ideological attachment to standing between Australians and employers. Thirty per cent of part-time workers in the retail industry and 40 per cent of part-time workers in the accommodation and food services sectors can work extra hours under the modifications and reforms contemplated by the IR omnibus bill. Instead, we see the Labor Party saying no.

We've offered a clear and consistent pathway to convert casual employment to full-time employment for the first time. But, by blocking this legislation, Labor would rather have casual workers remain casual even if they prefer permanency. In opposing these changes, Labor has decided that it is against casual employees and it would rather keep those casual employees as collateral damage in their ongoing class warfare in this country. So much for Labor being on your side!

If you're not a casual who wants permanent work, they will leave you aside.

At the moment the Labor Party are proposing to cut workers' pay and conditions. We've seen with the thought bubble from the Leader of the Opposition last week a $20 billion a year business tax and a cut for casuals equal to, on average, $153 a week. That's right; they would take $153 a week out of your pocket and impose a $20 billion a year tax on Australian business. We've seen this from the ACTU. Which side of this chamber proposes to cut workers' pay? It is those opposite.

When Labor vote against this bill they will also be voting against increased criminal penalties for wage theft. Those who have experienced wage theft or underpayment will be better protected under the reforms proposed by this government. You might think that this would be uncontroversial, but those opposite are too busy playing politics with this bill, to the detriment of hardworking Australians. The tougher civil and new criminal penalties to stamp out wage theft are simply casualties of Labor's class war—collateral damage, like the casual workers they would sooner deny the opportunity of permanent employment. Indeed, a quicker way to recover underpayments where they occur is also included in this bill. Instead, by blocking this bill, Labor have said that they don't want it easier to recover wages for those exploited workers in Australia. So much for the Labor Party being on your side!

In this bill enterprise agreements are said to be more easily implemented, have tighter approval time frames and deliver 40 per cent, on average, higher wages into the pockets of Australians compared to awards, and yet the Labor Party stand in their way. When we consider 2020 we should be doing everything in our power to reduce the red tape, to reduce the restrictions and to reduce the amount of time between employees lawfully reaching an agreement with an employer and the increasing amounts of money in their pay packets. Instead, because of the prevarication of the Labor Party, we see nothing.

Instead, we have seen a proposal for portable entitlements. It should be no surprise to us that Labor has trotted this out. It's an attractive idea at first glance. Stop and take stock of how that would actually be implemented. We see examples already writ large in the Australian economy of the Labor Party doing dodgy deals, as Senator Sheldon referred to, joining forces, taking money from hardworking Australians and putting it away in secretive slush funds that donate money from the unions to the ALP.

What motivates us is the idea that Australians be empowered to control the fruits of their own labour and keep more of their hard-earned money that they earn for themselves and their families. Yet those opposite, under the union control that they seem unable to step away from, in the case of Incolink in Victoria happily take money from working Australians and donate $8½ million to the CFMEU. They take $10 million off Australian workers and give it away in wages in a jobs-for-the-boys scandal that, frankly, Australians should be appalled about.

You tell me who cares about the wellbeing of working Australians and their pay and conditions. It seems to be the Morrison government, with a track record of being focused on job opportunities and job creation. Yet the Morrison government finds itself unable to deliver for those hardworking Australians because of those opposite. You might think that this loss of workers' entitlements would be well-known, but far less well-known is the fact that, having taken money from those hardworking Australians and put it into a slush fund under the guise of portable entitlements, the payment of those entitlements, far from being governed by law, is in fact at the 'absolute discretion' of the trustee. When determining the amount and period of entitlement that the worker shall receive, the decision of the trustee is 'final' and the worker has no right of appeal.

The silence from the Labor Party is deafening when it comes to defending themselves on this matter. In fact, we shouldn't expect anything less from the CFMMEU. Funded by money stolen from workers in this way, building unions break the law more than anyone. Responsible in 90 per cent of Federal Court cases for coercion, right of entry and freedom of association breaches, they're 20 times more likely than all other unions combined to break the law. Indeed, the CFMMEU secretary at the time said, 'If you play by the law, you'll never win.' So it is no wonder that the Labor Party, beholden to these union thugs, has chosen to stand in the way of a proposal to offer Australians new opportunities to convert casual employment to full-time employment to offer flexibility to accommodate family life, caring responsibilities, sport, education and everything else that makes up modern life. Instead they obstinately stick to their union domination, obstructing the government from implementing these important reforms.