Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Brandis. When asked yesterday whether the Prime Minister supports a pay cut in real terms for those on the minimum wage, the minister said:

So far as I am aware, there are no proceedings currently before the Fair Work Commission of the kind that you have suggested.

On the very same day the government filed its 85-page submission to the Fair Work Commission annual wage review 2017. Can the minister confirm he is so out of touch he was unaware that the Fair Work Commission is currently conducting its annual wage review and that his own government was making a submission?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Once again, Senator McAllister, you have got to listen to the answer. The deadline for the filing of submissions was close of business yesterday. The proceedings have not yet begun. I do not know when the first hearing day is of the case, but I imagine the first hearing day of the case is in the next week or so. But the proceedings have not yet begun.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A supplementary question, Senator McAllister.

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do have a supplementary question. The government submission says:

… low-paid workers are more likely to be young, female, single or without children.

Why is the Turnbull government opposed to a wage rise for women and young people?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have looked at the submission. We are not opposing a wage rise at all but, consistent with the practice of governments of both political persuasions, the government does not nominate a particular figure for the minimum wage. Let me read to you what has been submitted to the commission:

The Australian government considers that the approach to the minimum wages must be both economically responsible and fair.

     …      …      …

Therefore, the [national minimum wage] should be set at a level that provides sufficient incentives for people who are not employed, including those receiving unemployment benefits, to enter work. However, the [national minimum wage] should not be set so high as to place undue financial burdens on businesses, discouraging them from employing low skilled workers.

That was not our submission this year. It was your party's submission when you were in government and when Mr Shorten was the responsible minister. The submission this government filed yesterday, in proceedings yet to commence, was to the same effect. (Time expired)

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McAllister, a final supplementary question.

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When Australia is seeing the lowest wage growth since the ABS first published the wage price index in 1998, why is the government refusing to support a pay raise for those living on the minimum wage?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McAllister, I would have thought you would have known this, given your industrial background. It has never been the practice of Australian governments, either coalition or Labor, to propose a particular figure in the national minimum wage case. What the government asks the commission to do is to have regard to the overall economic circumstances and the likely impact on the economy of any particular increase in the minimum wage. More commonly than not, governments of both sides, like the Rudd and Gillard governments and the current government, have urged caution or restraint in imposing burdens on business, as your side of politics did when it was you making submissions as a government on the minimum wage. We certainly do not, however, support the $45 a week increase the ACTU has called for, because that would be irresponsible.