Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Happy birthday, Mr Deputy President. On behalf of the opposition, I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills, Jobs and Workplace Relations (Senator Evans) to questions without notice asked by Opposition senators today relating to the Qantas dispute.

I never thought I would be in a position to stand shoulder to shoulder with the National Secretary of the Transport Workers Union, but his description of the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills, Jobs and Workplace Relations was absolutely right when he said:

We've got a minister who I would describe as the character out of Weekend at Bernie's. He's the dead guy that stands in the middle. He is not able to act—

he is not able to perform his duties.

The consequences we witnessed over the weekend show how prophetic those words of Mr Sheldon were, because the minister and the government failed to act in circumstances when they knew they could and should have acted. Indeed, the inconvenience to the Australian public is huge. People were denied being able to attend important family occasions such as weddings or going to assist the sick in their difficult times. Indeed, it has sent shock waves through the tourism sector, not to mention the impact on our international reputation, with 17 CHOGM leaders having to take alternative methods of transport back to their countries.

This is a government that could have taken action and should have taken action under section 431 of the Fair Work Act. Its failure to do so was described by the Prime Minister as a result of uncertainty in relation to that clause, a clause written by the Prime Minister herself when she was the Minister for Workplace Relations. What a great testament that is to her own work! What a great endorsement of her own work! And she says that because of that uncertainty, because that provision had never been tried before, the government decided to opt for section 424. That is a great line but for the fact that section 424 had never been tested before Fair Work Australia either. Which is it, Prime Minister? Which is it, Minister? Is it because the legislation had not been tested or because they were not willing to stand up to some of the union activities, especially by the now reputed next President of the Australian Labor Party, Mr Sheldon?

We in this country are entitled to have air services that are reliable. Everybody knew where this dispute was headed. Indeed, the Minister for Tourism, Martin Ferguson, warned 14 days ago where it was going. Webjet was warning. The Premier of New South Wales warned. The Premier of Victoria warned. Indeed, so did I, on Meet the Press the week before—and so the list goes on. But the minister says: 'We got caught flat-footed. We were ambushed.' Well, where were they? I think he was as Mr Sheldon also described the minister. He said:

I have no confidence in Chris Evans's capacity to deal with the fundamental industrial relations issues in this country …

When the trade union movement are saying that about their own minister, one understands why the Australian public was so grossly inconvenienced over the weekend by the government's inaction.

The government now acknowledge that they were not in fact ambushed. That was just another bit of a distortion, such as why they did not use section 431. They now accept that they had three hours notice. Why didn't they say to Qantas at the time, 'We will intervene; don't ground your fleet'? Do you honestly think Qantas would have still grounded their fleet? The government could have promised action—quick action, decisive action. But of course this is a Prime Minister who can ring up a boy in a Bali prison and who can give gratuitous advice to the Commonwealth heads of government and to the European Union but who cannot run her own country and her own industrial relations system. This has been an abject failure by the government and their minister, and the government need to wear the blame for this dispute. (Time expired)

Mark Bishop (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If I have time at the end, I will return to the speech just made by Senator Abetz, because the speech made by Senator Abetz is the greatest nonspeech that he has made in this place for a long, long time. In the last three months, we have not seen one press release, one speech or one comment on this issue from Senator Abetz. Now, when there is a lockout caused by outside agents, he has plenty to say, but what he says is not about what occurs in the dispute and it is not about the facts; it is a nonspeech. Let us put the facts on the record, and I will make sure that I have a minute or two at the end just to respond to those points.

What do we know has occurred in this in the last few months? Senator Evans outlined the facts of what has been occurring. The government has been in constant contact with both sides in this dispute. It has been actively engaged in assisting parties to try and get a resolution on issues of wages, on issues of outsourcing, on issues of conditions and on issues of new enterprises to be set up in Asia. It has been going along to meeting after meeting, offering alternatives, offering ideas, suggesting compromises and offering suggestions. Never at any time in the last three or four months has Qantas, through its agents, or any of the trade unions requested the government to become involved at any other level than that of observing and giving advice. In fact, when pressed, as Senator Evans says, they have said: 'Not your role. We don't want you involved. We can settle our own negotiations.' So the government has simply done the proper thing when it has an act and a set of regulations: it has observed and offered assistance when requested.

What then did we have through that process? Depending on where you live, sometime on late Saturday morning or early Saturday afternoon we had a phone call from the Chief Executive Officer of Qantas, Mr Joyce, to both Senator Evans and Mr Albanese, advising the government that with no notice, forthwith, all aeroplanes anywhere in Australia and all around the world would be grounded—and, if the information given to government should leak, Qantas intended to bring forward the lockout time. So it was clearly the intent of the company to bring operations to a halt, to cease operations in Australia and all around the world. Why? To exert pressure. And it did so in the most callous, brutal fashion. It said to people in Los Angeles, London, Russia, Asia, Melbourne and Perth: 'You can get nicked. You can stay there or you can find your own way home. If it takes 24 hours or 48 hours, so be it.' There was no notice. They just said: 'Make your own way. Get your own bus to the aeroplane. If you happen to be in a place like Perth, with tens of thousands of delegates and not a hotel room to be had for love nor money, bad luck—sleep in the parklands.' The message from the CEO of Qantas to Minister Evans and Minister Albanese was: 'Mind your own business. We don't want you involved. We're going to take unilateral action. If you're a passenger about to get on a plane who has spent something like $5,000 to $10,000 to get a trip overseas, then bad luck. Get back in the terminal and get home—or, if you happen to be in Perth or Melbourne, where hotel rooms are not available, then just suck it up, and in due course something will happen.'

As soon as that happened, the government became actively involved. A subcommittee of the cabinet was convened. The relevant minister was given authority to apply to Fair Work Australia for orders ceasing the industrial action. That was initiated within three or four hours. The discussions continued for something like 24 hours at Fair Work Australia, and this morning, I am advised, orders were issued. And what was the effect of those orders? Qantas went back to work. Employees were rehired. People could get back on planes. Planes are back in the air—which should have been the case all the way through. As Senator Evans said quite clearly, a blatant, callous, harm-intending lockout is the worst form of industrial action a company can take—equivalent to deliberate attacks on companies by unions in days gone by. We did not tolerate it then and we do not tolerate it now. The behaviour of Qantas in locking out its own employees for its immediate gain is something that should be condemned by everyone. So the government did the right thing. (Time expired)

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party, Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Happy birthday, Mr Deputy President. The issue of unilateral action is precisely this: the government knew it was possible because they wrote the act. The Prime Minister of Australia, Julia Gillard, wrote the act. So who is responsible for this? The Prime Minister of Australia, Julia Gillard. Here we go. It is just like Fantasia, this whole comic apparatus that is now our nation's government. I flew down here today—flying on Virgin, of course. Everybody got here. That is something that both the unions and management should realise: in the end, everybody actually arrived here. People can make their own arrangements if they have to, and they can make them despite both parties.

So we fly down here on Virgin, and there are all the Qantas planes parked up there, becoming new aviaries for swallows. You turn on the television and there is Kevin Rudd. I do not know precisely what he is doing, but he looks like he is having a jolly good time at a certain event in Western Australia. And we come in here and debate climate change. It is all just falling down around our ears. The whole thing is manifestly a metaphor for what this government is. They say, 'We didn't have warning; we didn't know what was going on.'

I was fascinated to read on Crikey—and that is one group of people who do not say very nice things about me—back on 20 October:

In an interview on ABC News 24 this morning the transport minister Anthony Albanese, agreed that the government could use its powers under the Fair Work Act to intervene and force a resolution of the differences between the parties if the national interest was affected.

So it is all there. Ten days ago they were talking about it. Then we see Mr Albanese on television like a rabbit in the spotlight. It is fascinating. He was 'ambushed'; he 'didn't know anything about it'. And then we hear from Qantas CEO Alan Joyce that they gave them three hours notice—three hours notice of a train wreck—but they forgot to tell the driver or the passengers. They just let it happen. Why? Because they are at CHOGM, dancing. There is a barbecue on. And the nation is coming to a grinding halt.

They say it is 'extreme action' to lock out pilots and to shut the show down. It may be, but isn't that the same extreme action you took when you shut down the live cattle trade? We woke up one day and, overnight, you had just shut the show down. Isn't this an action that you have participated in yourself—in fact, been the instigators of? So everything you say is confounded and wrong and confused and misled. Every piece of evidence points to the fact that you just did not have your fingers on the pulse.

This nation cannot go on like this. We just cannot keep going from one fiasco to the next while at the same time planning to change the temperature of the globe. Australia cannot go on like this, borrowing tens of billions of dollars. We are now $215 billion in gross debt. It is a possibility that we could go completely off the rails. What happens to the share price is really dangerous. We are not even on autopilot in this nation; we are in complete free fall. Who is in control over there? Who is running the show? Who is the minister? Who is competent? Which person is actually going to take responsibility for this? What do you think Alan Joyce has been doing down here? Do you think he likes the coffee over at Aussie's? He has been there every second day. For a while there I thought maybe he was related to me, because I keep bumping into him everywhere I go. Maybe he is just coming around here because he likes the smell of the carpet. Maybe he has nothing to do in his own office. He just likes coming down to Canberra to talk to people.

What more warning were you looking for? Maybe they wanted a telegram from the Queen, who was here the other day. Were you waiting for the archangel Gabriel to descend from heaven and say: 'I think we might have a problem here. The CEO of a major company has been saying, in his own words, that he might close the show down, that people may be put off from their jobs'? Then, when it happens, there is surprise and wonder—and, as always, complete and utter catastrophe by reason of your management. (Time expired)

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I remind senators to address their remarks through the chair.

Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to wish you a happy birthday, Mr Deputy President!

The Qantas dispute has been widely known and public. There has rarely been a more public industrial dispute in Australia's history. The media has been covering it with intense interest over the last several months. It has been clearly known that the arbiter in this area will be Fair Work Australia. There has been no disagreement about that. The responsibility for industrial relations, for enterprise bargaining and disputes, must belong with the parties involved, in this case the Qantas management and the three unions that have gone public with a range of claims, all of which have been debated, discussed and reported in the media of Australia over the last couple of months.

As recently as last Friday, the Qantas AGM was covered in the media. You would have thought it was the most important issue of the day to have a look at what was happening with the Qantas board, the Qantas management and the public meeting. Through all that process, we had commentary and we heard from a range of people who were linked with various groups attending that annual general meeting, all talking about the future, all talking about change and many talking about the current industrial action. At no stage in all that coverage was there any discussion about imminent close-down action. At no stage was there any discussion about the need for an immediate referral to the Fair Work Australia arbiter.

What happened on Saturday has been covered in minute detail. I wonder exactly how this degree of detail has become so public. I am particularly engaged with the eight-minute process from the beginning of the call and all the actions that were taken. What occurred was that the CEO made what he has referred to as a courtesy call—and I like the use of that particular term, when we are looking at an industry that is so important for our nation and to people both here in Australia and overseas. He made a courtesy call to people with whom he had been in discussion many times over the last few months, to say that he and his board had made the decision to shut down all Qantas activity and not only to shut it down but to ensure that there was going to be no action. The announcement was made and apparently—I find this particularly interesting, and I call upon the media to ask some questions about this—there were safety issues about what could occur if this notification were made. There was an implication that Qantas staff members would then take some action which would make their airline, their employer and the people of Australia unsafe. I am really keen to find out more about that allegation, because I think there is a lot to be heard there.

The government is now using the Fair Work Act, legislation that I remember we took hours of debate to agree to in this place. The government of Australia, in its role as protector of Australia's economy, took an immediate decision to do that when it heard that the management of Qantas had decided in their role as employer to close down this monumental industry, regardless of the impact it would have on people in this country. We have heard heart-rending stories about the impact this decision has had. It was a decision not by the government or by the unions but by Qantas management.

The government, through the minister responsible for industrial relations, then took the matter to a hearing of Fair Work Australia to look at the issues and to find the best way forward. After an extraordinarily long session of Fair Work Australia—because the issues are complex; this is not a straightforward, simple dispute—orders have been handed down and the process now is back with the key parties: the employers and the unions. They have a set period of time to negotiate, which they should have been doing and have been doing. We have heard amazing details today in the media about what negotiations have gone on. We need to have the people involved in this serious dispute come together to come up with a suitable reaction. That is what is expected in industrial relations in this country, with the support and the intervention of Fair Work Australia. That should come as no surprise. Basically we need to rebuild trust in the organisation which Australia loves. It is not a government organisation. Qantas is not owned or run by the government; it is a private organisation run by a board— (Time expired)

Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Prime Minister Gillard fiddles and the tourism industry burns. There are 500,000 people directly employed in this sector and one million people employed in the tourism and hospitality sector, which makes $24 billion in export earnings. Where was the Prime Minister of this country when she was required? It seems clear to me that the one person who could have resolved this issue is the Minister for Foreign Affairs, because, if the foreign minister had got involved two weeks ago, you can rest assured that the Prime Minister would have got involved, because it is only when the foreign minister acts that the Prime Minister acts. So I wish he had been there a little earlier, and those tens of thousands people stranded in airports wish he had been there a little earlier, so that the Prime Minister would have acted. Her nemesis would have driven her to do something. But no. Isn't it fascinating? The Prime Minister cannot pick up the phone to speak to Alan Joyce, but she can pick up the phone to ring someone in Bali. She cannot pick up the phone to speak to the President of Nauru, but she can pick up the phone to speak to someone in Bali, only on the back of the foreign minister having made a call beforehand. This is a Prime Minister who has completely and utterly lost control of this government and indeed has completely and utterly lost control of this country.

It is fascinating to read some of the newspaper articles today. I will quote from the Daily Telegraph. This was posted at 12.18 pm:

The high-profile Qantas executive Olivia Wirth has confirmed she called Julia Gillard's chief of staff Ben Hubbard hours before Alan Joyce grounded Qantas and said the CEO was available to speak to the Prime Minister.

Indeed, the same newspaper article says that he waited until five minutes before the decision for the Prime Minister to ring. And that same newspaper article says:

Mr Joyce had intended to give Ms Gillard advance warning of his intention to announce that he was grounding the airline's entire fleet and leaving almost 70,000 passengers a day stranded.

The article also says:

Mr Joyce would have abandoned his decision to ground the airline had PM Julia Gillard returned his call and promised to directly intervene.

But no: the Prime Minister was too busy with CHOGM to worry about the affairs of this nation and too busy trying to convince people from elsewhere about the bona fides of a carbon tax that we now find that the Canadians do not support either. She was too busy doing everything else other than what she should have been doing as Prime Minister.

The result of this has been quite catastrophic. Anyone who knows anything about the tourism sector knows that they are in diabolic strife. The last thing that the tourism sector needed was a Prime Minister failing to act in the interest of the nation and in the interest of the tourism sector. I will read some comments from people involved in the sector. Ten days before the grounding, this was in an article in the Australian:

Flight Centre managing director Graham Turner said the government should step in to force a solution to the dispute.

'If they can't do that, it makes you wonder why we elected a government,' Mr Turner said. 'This is exactly the sort of situation where they should be actively searching or forcing a solution.'

John Lee from the Transport and Tourism Forum said:

… we are already seeing a drop-off in forward bookings which will now only get worse … The 500,000 people directly employed in Australia's $94 billion tourism industry do not deserve to have their livelihoods threatened by this, which could be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

Des Crowe, the national CEO of the AHA, said:

The grounding of the Qantas fleet will have an immediate and devastating impact on the tourism industry during what is traditionally one of the busiest times of the year for many hotels.

This Prime Minister should have acted; this Prime Minister failed to act again.

Question agreed to.