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

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Agriculture, Drought and Emergency Management, Senator Ruston. In recent days, the Morrison government has announced significant changes to the working holiday maker scheme and arrangements for foreign workers. The United Kingdom's Department for International Trade has published a glossy document boasting that 'Aussie firms will no longer have to prioritise hiring Australian nationals first'. Why is the Morrison government taking jobs away from Australians and giving them to UK citizens?

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Families and Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Sheldon for his question. Given the information that has just been provided to the chamber by Senator Birmingham, I think we should all be delighting in the fact that we are seeing more Australians back in work than before the pandemic. And we should all be celebrating the fact that we have an unemployment rate of 5.1 per cent today. Who would have thought, when we went into the pandemic, that the economic recovery in this country was going to be so strong as to see 5.1 per cent unemployment in Australia? In the home state of Senator Cash, who's sitting next to me, it's down to 4.4 per cent, which is getting very, very close to full employment.

Making sure that we provide a balance, and ensuring that Australians who wish to get into the workforce are able to take that opportunity, is a very important platform of the Morrison-McCormack government's economic policy. We want to see every single Australian who is able to work, in work. That's why we have put in place so many programs, particularly in recent times as we come out of the COVID pandemic. Through JobMaker we've got skilling and retraining programs to make sure that Australians who find themselves without work have a pathway back into the workforce. But we also hear—on the other side of the equation—that there are businesses that are struggling to get employees, and we need to make sure that we provide them with a pool of resources so that they can get workers. That in no way denies that our absolute fundamental policy position of this government is to make sure that Australians who are unemployed—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Keneally, on a point of order?

Kristina Keneally (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question of relevance—the question was quite specific from Senator Sheldon. The British government has said that Aussie firms will no longer have to prioritise hiring Australian nationals first. The minister hasn't addressed the question: why is the government giving away Australian jobs?

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Keneally, the latter part of your point of order there means that while the minister is talking about the matters that she is, it is quite a wide-ranging part of the question at the end of what Senator Sheldon asked. I think while the minister is talking about—Senator Wong?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Could you clarify, Mr President, which is the wide-ranging bit?

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why is the—

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why is the Morrison government taking jobs away from Australians and giving them to UK citizens? It is clearly about one issue.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister is talking about prioritising jobs for Australians. I'll just finish my explanation and people can take issue with it. I view that question as giving the minister some latitude to answer and to challenge it, and to explain why they are doing the opposite. As long as it's not a general commentary on the unemployment or employment market—if the minister is talking about why they disagree with that question, or talking about prioritising in government policy, I think that's relevant. Senator Ruston.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Families and Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Mr President. The Australian government will always prioritise jobs for Australians. We will always prioritise jobs for Australians. We want to make sure that every Australian who wishes to have a job is able—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Keneally.

Kristina Keneally (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to table the Ten key benefits of the UK-Australia Free Trade Agreement where it clearly says, 'Aussie firms will no longer have to prioritise hiring Australians first'—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Birmingham, you are on your feet.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I was just going to respond. Senator Keneally well knows the protocols and etiquettes in relation to tabling documents in this place. If she wishes to follow those protocols then the government will look at it in accordance with those protocols rather than seeking—

Senator Keneally interjecting—

You have sought leave; you haven't shared the document with the government to my knowledge. You're waving a document around that the government has not seen. You know the protocols. If we you were doing the same, you would deny leave.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The clerk has advised me that one can't interrupt a speaker to seek leave to table. I was not aware of that particular procedure. Senator Wong, to your point, I can only deal with—

Senator Wong interjecting—

Oh, please do. Sorry, I thought I was dealing with—

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I hadn't actually stood to make a point again. My point is, if you read it that broadly, Mr President, with all due respect, the minister can do precisely what she is doing, which is to engage in motherhood statements. 'We all will prioritise Australian jobs.' It's unsurprising that you are then going to get a response from the opposition seeking to table documents. Direct relevance means dealing with the issue at hand. Just because something says 'jobs', it doesn't mean a minister can stand up and answer a question by saying, 'We all love jobs.'

Honourable senators interjecting—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I'm happy to rule. I've taken submissions. I'm not complaining about the opposition objecting to the nature of a question, Senator Wong. I've allowed the opposition to restate and to emphasise the part of the question and to take points of order. I was just pointing out to Senator Keneally that I was corrected by the clerk. I wasn't aware that you couldn't interrupt to seek leave. That was something I learnt. When it comes to the point of order, I can only deal with questions the way that they are asked. I submit, Senator Wong, that you are asking me to go to the content of a minister's answer and how they might answer a question rather than whether they are directly relevant. When a question is 'why is the government'—if I read it correctly—'taking away jobs from Australians in favour of someone else' the minister is entitled to say otherwise, as long as it's not a general commentary on unemployment or employment. I think when the minister was talking about that bit, when the point of order was raised, that constitutes direct relevance. There is an opportunity to debate the content and answers after question time and whether or not the chamber thinks the content of those answers is sufficient or satisfactory. Senator Ruston.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Families and Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much. To be directly relevant to Senator Sheldon's question, the Australian government will always prioritise Australian jobs—

Honourable senators interjecting—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Your point of order—you are seeking leave?

Kristina Keneally (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to table the document from the United Kingdom government that I have just cited here in the chamber that says, 'Aussie firms will no longer have to prioritise hiring Aussie nationals first.'

Leave granted.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Sheldon, a supplementary question?

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

Thank you. Yesterday when announcing the new agriculture visa, Minister Littleproud said: 'I'll mirror the existing Seasonal Worker Program. It is really an extension of the working holiday scheme.' Given these are entirely different standards and requirements between these programs, which is it?

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Families and Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, both of the programs to which Senator Sheldon refers are very, very important programs to support Australia's agricultural sector. In announcing yesterday the agreement that we're putting in place with our ASEAN friends, to make sure that we are able to support Australian farmers, who are often looking for labour and unable to fill their labour shortages in Australia, I think it is an exceptional initiative for us to be able to support people in our region but, at the same time, support our farmers, who are crying out for labour at the moment.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong, on a point of order?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. The point of order is on direct relevance. The question goes directly to whether or not this new agricultural visa will mirror the Seasonal Worker Program or extend the working holiday scheme. They are different schemes with different conditions. We have not asked about those existing schemes. We've asked, as to the new scheme: which architecture will it follow? So I would ask you to remind the minister that she is not being asked to give us an explanation of why the SWP or the working holiday visa are such great things. She's being asked to explain the new agricultural visa.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And on that point: if I'm being asked to order the minister to go to explain the differences, I think that is going to the content of an answer. However, to be directly relevant—

Senator Wong interjecting—

Let me finish, please, Senator Wong. To be directly relevant, because it was a tightly-worded question, the minister must speak about the new scheme. But I can't direct the minister to answer about the content or the type of answer, which is when you're asking about differences. The minister can be directly relevant—

Senator Wong interjecting—

Well, Senator Wong, I'm listening very carefully. I will admit this is not an area of policy where I am as aware of the details as others in the chamber, but I am listening very carefully. I've allowed you to restate the question and I have made my ruling. Senator Ruston, you have 23 seconds remaining.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Families and Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My understanding is that the new scheme will work alongside both the Seasonal Worker Program and the working holiday makers and that the exact and specific details of the new scheme are currently being worked out.

Opposition senators interjecting—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Families and Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm happy to come back to this chamber with more information around the exact details around the working of the—

Opposition senators interjecting—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Ruston—

Opposition senators interjecting—

Order on my left! Order!

Senator Sheldon interjecting—

Senator Sheldon, if I could have a moment, please—

Opposition senators interjecting—

Senators on my left, we are wasting question time, which is traditionally a period for the non-government parties. I would not have been able to rule on a subsequent point of order then, because I could not hear Senator Ruston. So there is way too much noise in the chamber. Senator Sheldon, a final supplementary question?

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

Can the minister confirm that, in recent days, the Morrison government has undermined Australian workers, undermined the Pacific Step-up and worsened the risk of worker exploitation in Australia?

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Families and Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, we have not, Senator Sheldon.

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order on my left!

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Families and Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We absolutely have not. What we have sought to do is to make sure that we support Australians, through a number of initiatives, who wish to get into work, but, at the same time, we also recognise that there are some sectors of the Australian economy that are crying out for workers at the moment and are unable to fill those particular positions within Australia. So what this government has sought to do is to have a suite of measures that support everybody in the Australian economy, whether it be Australians who find themselves out of work, and making sure that we provide them with the skills and the retraining so that they can get back into the workforce, but which, at the same time, support our farmers, who are crying out for labour. So what we will do is continue to make sure that we address all of the issues that our economy faces, going forward, and not just one of them, by making sure we support our businesses to make sure they've got employees and then support our Australians into work.

Senator Watt interjecting—

Senator Keneally interjecting—

Senator Rennick interjecting—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Watt, Senator Keneally, Senator Rennick. Senator Rennick, Senator Watt: remember my rule about counting to 10 after your name is called?