Tony Sheldon (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am taking note of answers to those questions that were put by the opposition. In particular, I will start off with the question that was put by Senator McKenzie about the regional effect of industrial relations policy. I recall Senator McKenzie saying that the Nationals at one time represented regional communities, but what Senator McKenzie is actually saying is that she's opposed to minimum wage increases for some of the lowest paid workers in this country. What Senator McKenzie is failing to enlighten the rest of the Senate and the Australian community about is the fact that when there were increases to the minimum wage in 2022, 2023 and 2024—leading to people earning $110 extra a week, which has a particular effect in regional communities—the member for New England, Mr Barnaby Joyce, described it as window dressing. So here we've got questions being asked by those on the opposite side, who are saying the industrial relations policy that delivers better pay for communities in regional Australia is something that should be abandoned.

Then we start going to same job, same pay. Some of the richest, most powerful and most influential—you only have to ask the Nationals—mining companies and other businesses in this country want to smash and slash same job, same pay. Workers in regional Australia are now finally, as a result of the legislation we brought forward, getting paid between $20,000 and $30,000 extra for doing exactly the same job that the person next to them is doing. They were getting paid less despite being under the same supervision and the same rosters and doing the same job. Senator McKenzie wants to bring all that back. Where there are well-paid jobs in regional Australia, those opposite want to drive them down, and, where there are low-paid jobs, they want to make sure they can only go lower. If you say $110 a week is window dressing, I think you need start asking somebody in your own community how much window dressing $110 a week is, and you need to start asking everybody across the Australian community about what the impact of a government led by Mr Dutton would be if it were, unfortunately, to be elected. Regional Australia would be smashed.

These are the people opposed to a future made in Australia. You can name any policy. These are the people who are opposed to the support that was given by this Labor government on electricity. They want everyone to pay $230 extra a year. They want to have people's wages go lower. They want the people who are getting paid a fair wage to lose $20,000—hit after hit after hit. Why? Because miners and their ilk, some of the wealthiest organisations in this country, want to make sure they can put more in their pockets, so the Nationals want to make sure that the miners can put their hands in others' pockets, which would mean that regional Australia gets paid less.

Let's start talking about some of the things those opposite have already let out in the industrial relations field and some of the impacts in the trucking industry. I remember that when legislation was passed here on road haulage, giving support on industrial relations policy to medium, small and large businesses, those opposite voted against it. Guess where a large number of jobs are in regional Australia: in the trucking industry, where, in particular, small and medium operators are operating. So those opposite want to smash them as well. They want businesses, including small businesses, smashed. Do you know who wins out of that? It's the big businesses at the top.