Senate debates
Tuesday, 28 March 2017
Questions without Notice
Workplace Relations
2:30 pm
Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Brandis. Yesterday, the minister failed to tell the Senate what work the government has undertaken on the overall economic and budgetary impact of the cut to penalty rates his government supports. Given that the minister, or the Prime Minister, claims that the pay cut of up to $77 a week for up to 700,000 workers 'will generate more jobs and more employment', what work has the government undertaken on the overall economic impact of the cut to penalty rates?
2:31 pm
George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I thought I told you—was it you or one of your colleagues yesterday, Senator Gallacher?
George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
It was you—that the government, in fact, last Friday, made a submission to the Fair Work Commission in which it specifically made representations to the Fair Work Commission in relation to the implementation phase of its award with a particular request that it consider the interests and mitigation strategies to protect the interests of those who may be affected by the award. That is what I told you yesterday, Senator Gallacher, and that was the submission.
Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator Gallacher, a supplementary question.
2:32 pm
Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The Liberal member for Bowman, Andrew Laming, has said about the decision to cut penalty rates, 'There will be virtually negligible difference in either jobs created or hours.' Who is correct, the Prime Minister or the member for Bowman?
Senator Sterle interjecting—
George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator Gallacher, I have not seen Dr Laming's remarks, so it is not my practice to comment on remarks that I have not seen, nor would you expect me to. However, I am familiar with the Prime Minister's remarks, and I entirely agree with them. I believe—and it used to be the position of your side of politics too, by the way, Senator Gallacher—that, when an independent court or tribunal established to act independently of the executive government makes an award, it behoves everyone, whether they agree with the decision or whether they do not, to support it, because to refuse to support the decision is to defy the rule of law.
Senator Sterle interjecting—
Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Before I call Senator Gallacher, Senator Sterle, the use of props the way you have been using them is disorderly. Please desist.
2:33 pm
Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Why has the Prime Minister committed his government to supporting cuts to penalty rates when he cannot even convince his own backbench of their merit?
George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I am sorry, Senator Gallacher, but every time you make that misleading statement I am going to correct you. What the Prime Minister has said is that he supports the decision of the Fair Work Commission, because the Fair Work Commission is the independent arbiter. We do support the decision of the Fair Work Commission and we would support whatever decision the Fair Work Commission made, because if you set up an independent arbiter, as your side of politics did when you were in government, Senator Gallacher, then you are obliged to support it, unless you want to attack its integrity, which in effect is what the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Shorten, is now doing. I referred in answer to your colleague Senator Urquhart's question before about the lamentable and shameful record of the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Bill Shorten, when it comes to selling workers down the drain by accepting secret commissions and trading away their terms and conditions, so do not come in here and attack an independent tribunal. (Time expired)