Andrew McLachlan (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I inform the Senate that at 8.30 am today 33 proposals were received in accordance with standing order 75. The question of which proposal would be submitted to the Senate was determined by lot. As a result, I inform the Senate that the letter from Senator Rennick proposing a matter of public importance was chosen, namely:

The apparent intention of the Albanese Government to adopt the union movement's call for industry wide bargaining, which would risk large parts of the Australian economy being unnecessarily shut down as a result of strike action.

Is the proposal supported?

More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

I understand that informal arrangements have been made to allocate specific times to each of the speakers in today's debate. With the concurrence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to set the clock accordingly.

Gerard Rennick (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm very pleased to rise to speak to this today, because nothing motivates me more than standing up for the hardworking people of this country. If we bring back multi-pattern bargaining in this country, it will be a job killer. We do not want to see our hardworking battlers lose their jobs in in this country. Just as importantly, we don't want to see our small businesses shut down. Believe you me, this is an attack on small business by the usual suspects—the big end of town, the big unions and the big corporations—who want to drive true innovation and entrepreneurship out of this country.

If there's one thing that the Labor Party love its command and control, and that is exactly what this issue is all about. It is about having unions dictate to small businesses what sorts of rules they can have in place. I want it to be absolutely that I am 100 per cent behind union membership. The comments that I am making are directed at the union elites—the same union elites who sit there year after year and call for superannuation rises. We've already had members in the other place call for a rise in superannuation of 15 per cent in the second term if Labor were to be re-elected. I would love to know exactly what low-income earners are meant to be taking home in their pay if 15 per cent of their money is going off into superannuation.

Make no mistake: this will hurt industry, especially small business, at a time when they cannot afford it. It will result in job losses and potentially result in more strikes. We saw what happened in the early 2000s, when there was basically pattern bargaining. The Productivity Commission noted that the estimated cost of lost production from two industrial disputes across the automotive industry the year before was up to $630 million. Do we really want to go into the history of the car manufacturing sector and how inflexible labour laws were a part of the reason, though not the only reason; I've got my own little beef to grind with withholding taxes as well—

Thank you very much for the interjection, Senator Green. This all started way back in 1986 to 1988 under the Button plan. The Button plan, which was introduced by the Hawke-Keating government, destroyed manufacturing in this country, most notably in Victoria. What Labor did straight after that was they brought the Dawkins plan in. So they destroyed the manufacturing sector and then they subsidised the university sector. Now we have the Greens on gender diversity and all of this stuff when we should be putting more money back into TAFE and getting people back into real jobs. One of the things that was completely overlooked in last week's job summit was the fact that, effectively, the first jobs you want to fill in this country are those jobs in your primary industries. Your farmers and your miners—that's where your true wealth comes from. Once you've those jobs filled up, then you work on your secondary industries— you go to your manufacturing industries. Yet, in this country, the Labor Party and the Greens do everything they can to destroy the primary and secondary industries.

Let me tell you, it is the primary and secondary industries—those jobs in manufacturing, farming and mining—that create the wealth to feed the people and help employ people in the services industry. If we want to actually rebuild this country, there needs to be more focus on getting back to primary production, mining and manufacturing. I'm an unashamed protectionist. I put my flag to the mast in my maiden speech. I called on Deakin and Barton, the first two prime ministers in this country who were protectionist. I'll be honest here. This neoliberalism—which, ironically enough, was introduced by the Hawke-Keating government—has basically lowered the barriers of nation states. Now, we've offshored just about all of our productive jobs in this country. So it is incredibly important, if we are to rebuild jobs in this country, that we maintain flexibility in the workplace.

I totally support minimum working conditions and fair conditions for the worker. I will be very clear about that. I myself come from a multigenerational blue-collar family, but the reason I'm on this side of the chamber is that I believe in the individual dignity and worth of every individual and in people having the flexibility to make their decisions. The Labor Party used to believe in that. We know they don't believe in that anymore. They introduced compulsory superannuation, and they never put that to the vote, did they? We know why they didn't. It's because in 1997 when New Zealand put compulsory superannuation to the vote they lost 92 per cent to eight. If Paul Keating had said to everyone in 1992, 'By 2020 we're going to take 10 per cent of your wages and give that to someone you've never met. You may or may not get it back when you're 60, and there's no capital guarantee that you're going to get it back,' do you think the people would have voted for that? Of course not.

What has this superannuation ended up funding? I'll tell you what it's funded. It's funded the privatisation of our sovereign infrastructure, so either Macquarie Bank owns it or the foreign offshore companies own it. We're now paying through the nose for toll roads and services. Our energy grid is on the verge of collapse, because we've had rent-seeking privateers in the superannuation industry always whinging that they want more handouts. Climate change is just this big, virtue-signalling distraction for the rent seekers in the private sector to be milking our essential services dry.

So, like I said, yet again, we have to maintain flexibility in the workplace. We have to let our small business flourish. They are not going to be able to flourish if they've got unions breathing down their throats over and beyond fair work and pay and minimum award conditions, forcing one set of rules from one industry onto another industry with another set of working conditions that are completely different to everyone else.

I tell you what, this is not what we want in this country. We should be trying to get Australians back into jobs, in particular those Australians who exercise their right in a free and democratic country not to take a jab which has been proven to be ineffective. Ten million cases by August 2022; I don't think it works. Sorry, but that's the facts. We have potentially hundreds of thousands of workers out of work, here in Australia, and what does this lot on the other side do, the Labor movement, want to do? They want to increase immigration to push out Australian workers who chose their democratic right to choose what goes into their bodies.

I heard a minister in the other place say last week, 'We're going to bring in nurses, because we've got a nursing shortage.' Maybe we have a nursing shortage because that side of the chamber continues to push people like nurses and teachers—they're not being vilified—out of work. I suggest before we start talking about bringing in rigid working conditions that are going to make it very difficult for small business—why would you want to start a small business in in this country with the Labor movement and the big unions and their bullying tactics and their coercion via mandates? Where were they with the mandates? They ran a mile. They do not believe in free choice. They don't believe in quality assurance. It's all about our way or the highway.

Heaven help us if the Labor Party gets in charge of industrial relations in this country. Even former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd knocked back pattern bargaining in 2007; they didn't even go that far. But we know that the Prime Minister of the day comes from the far, far, far left—any further left and he'd fall off the edge of the planet; that's how far left he is. He's done a very good job of hiding his Marxist tendencies and everything like that, but, don't you worry: he will be totally behind the whole 'You will be happy and own nothing' thing. He's going to do that through basically sending small business broke. Everything's going to come back to being state owned. And while I believe that sovereign infrastructure should be state owned, I certainly don't believe that is the case in the private sector.

Our small businesses are the true capitalists in this country, not the guys in big corporations now, who are controlled by the union funds. Over 20 per cent of all of our major blue chips now are controlled by industry funds. They all have one proxy adviser. Yet again, they've centralised power into the hands of a few inner-city urban elites who wouldn't know the difference between a brigalow and a box tree or between haematite and magnetite. No, they wouldn't know where the wealth in this country comes from, but they're more than happy to set down whole new bunch of rules and laws in this country that are going to drive small business broke and send hardworking Australians back home, in the gutter without a job.

Nita Green (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, here we go with the scaremongering from those opposite. It's clear that they are deeply embarrassed about the record years of low wage growth under their former government and are suffering from what I would call complete FOMO about refusing to turn up to the Jobs and Skills Summit. But this MPI gives me a chance to talk about how successful the Jobs and Skills Summit was and what outcomes it has led to. Given the Liberal Party's refusal to play a constructive role, they might have missed some of the positive outcomes that were agreed to at the summit. These include a massive investment in fee-free TAFE, an income credit for pensioners who want to get into the workforce, a fix for the visa backlog and fairer updates to the parental leave provisions. This government was also able to secure positive guiding principles for a new way forward on workplace relations, because at the Jobs and Skills Summit this government got everybody around the table. Businesses, unions and government agreed to work productively together to revitalise a culture of creativity, productivity, good-faith negotiations and genuine agreement in workplace laws. That is what those opposite are opposed to: working productively together to revitalise creativity, productivity, and genuine agreement in Australian workplace laws.

Last week the Jobs and Skills Summit showed us what good government can do. This side of the chamber demonstrated what is possible when we approach problems with curiosity rather than obstinance. We have highlighted that there is nothing to be feared by governing in a way that invites a range of perspectives, even disagreement at times, but always with respect. We saw that, despite the scare campaign from those opposite, there is nothing to be feared by breaking bread with people who don't talk, look or act like you do. At the Jobs and Skills Summit we demonstrated that Australians are hungry for cooperation in the name of national interest. Obviously there is detail that we need to consult on, and we are committed to doing that. But I know that the Albanese Labor government has the stamina to deliver on the principles agreed to at the summit. I'm excited to get to work on the reforms that I know will one day mean that people in this country will have higher wages. The challenge our Jobs and Skills Summit undertook was to address these very vast and significant issues.

It is very clear that the former government is embarrassed about the low wage growth over nine long years in government and is now trying to mobilise a fear campaign about plans to get wages moving again. The truth is, it was never harder to get a pay rise than under the previous government, and that has to change. In Australia, minimum standards are set by the Fair Work Commission, and if you want a wage increase above the legal minimum you must bargain with your employer for it.

In order to get a pay rise, workers in particular workplaces have to go through a complicated and lengthy process called enterprise bargaining. There are very long and technical steps that workers and their employers must go through to secure an enterprise bargaining agreement, and currently workers are only able to bargain workplace by workplace. This system was brought in over 30 years ago, and both workers and employers are saying that it is no longer fit for purpose. Certainly, at the round tables that I held in Mareeba, Cairns and Townsville in the lead-up to the summit, that is exactly what I was hearing from employers and workers alike. I heard that something needed to be done to improve the complexity of this system.

Enterprise bargaining was introduced at a time when workplaces had many more workers, giving them more power to bargain for good wages and conditions. Only one in every seven workers is currently covered by an EBA, meaning most workers aren't receiving regular wage rises. For that lucky one in seven, the system still isn't delivering, and it didn't deliver under nine years of the Liberal-National coalition. Workplaces are much smaller than they were when enterprise bargaining was introduced, meaning workers have fewer resources and less power to bargain on an even footing with their employers.

Workers and businesses are calling for multi-employer bargaining. It's nothing to be afraid of. Those opposite will try to create a scare campaign around it, but the Australian union movement and COSBOA, the representative organisation for small businesses, have come together to put forward sensible reform that allows for collective bargaining to take the most appropriate form for industry, which it is serving. Multi-employer bargaining allows workers who do the same job across multiple employers to bargain together for wage increases. Now, I'll give you an example of this, because I know that there will be a lot of misinformation coming from the other side of this chamber. Every childcare centre in Australia has its own set of wages and conditions. Under a multi-employer bargaining model, all early childhood educators could possibly come together, beyond their own centres, and bargain for an industrywide increase. There is no denying that childcare workers are some of our lowest-paid workers, yet they do some of the most important work. It boggles the mind that those opposite could be opposed to an instrument that would lead to wage rises for some of our lowest-paid, most highly feminised workforces.

More people means more power, which improves our chances of winning good wages and conditions for lower-paid workers. It is also good for business, because the current EBA process means employers have to fork out big sums of money to consultancies to navigate a complex system. This would make it easier for both workers and employers to negotiate and settle fair wage increases. The proposal, which has come from the ACTU and also from business, opens up the prospect of wage growth and collective bargaining for thousands more workers. Surely those opposite could not be opposed to more workers in our economy getting a wage increase. It is a critical step in tackling the wage crisis, because, when more workers and employers are able to bargain for wage increases, the earning capacity of working Australians will continue to grow.

Labor continues to maintain that a fair day's wage for a fair day's work is one of our core values, and we will always stand up for it. Despite the scaremongering of those opposite, we will stand here, always proudly representing unions and union members. There is no amount of intimidation that those opposite can level that would make us step away from those values, because let's be clear who those opposite are talking about when they are speaking about unions. Union members are frontline workers, and the majority of them are women. Nurses are union members. Teachers are union members. Aged-care workers are union members. Cleaners, pilots and bus drivers—these are all union members. And it's highly likely that the very people that were hailed as heroes by those opposite during the pandemic held a union ticket. Even our sporting heroes are union members. The Matildas are a fantastic football team and a national icon. They are union members and they took collective action. They went on strike so that they could get equal pay, and they delivered a historic pay deal which is unique to this part of the world.

Union members don't take legal, protected industrial action lightly, and when they do it's because they've exhausted every other avenue available to them. On the rare occasion that union members take the long, complex and difficult step of collective action it is because they have taken exhaustive legal steps to get there.

Don't let the other side of this chamber fool you. It was collective action that won a 38-hour week, it won annual leave and it won health and safety standards that make sure that we go home from work in the same condition we arrived in. Chances are that if your job has good wages and conditions, you have a union member to thank for that.

It is finally time for those opposite to stop the conflict, to build a consensus and to come together with us on this to solve the challenges that our country is facing. That is how we will get wages moving again in this country, because every Australian worker deserves a seat at the table and every Australian worker deserves fair wages and fair conditions.

Penny Allman-Payne (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this motion as a proud unionist. Unions are essential to the protection and advancement of workers' rights in this country. They ensure that the economic, social and environmental interests of workers are protected. All Australian workers should receive fair pay for fair work, but the reality is that many workers are falling through the gaps of our industrial relations system because they have been hamstrung by successive governments, who've denied them the right to collectively bargain across sectors.

The assertion that industry-wide bargaining would result in large parts of the Australian economy being shut down is nothing but a scare tactic. The coalition's attempt to make unions and the rights of workers their political punching bag should be strongly rejected. It is a sentiment that is inherently damaging to the rights of Australian workers. But this is to be expected from an opposition that is out of ideas and out of energy. All they know how to do is run scare campaigns and attack workers. The lack of creativity is truly breathtaking. But we shouldn't be surprised. This is run-of-the-mill stuff from the Liberals and Nationals, who've not had an approach to workplace relations in their history that didn't involve deliberately making wages stagnate and trampling on working people.

The Greens are in agreement with the ACTU on the need for the implementation of industry-wide bargaining, and we welcome the commitment by the government to its reintroduction. All the evidence shows that enterprise agreements negotiated by unions result in better pay and conditions for workers. We want to see more workers covered by these agreements and more workers being represented by their union. Union membership has been dropping for too many years.

Today only 14 per cent of employees are members of trade unions, and less in the private sector. This drop in union membership is a direct result of deliberate policy by successive governments dismantling legislative support for unions, placing restrictions on organising and forcing workers to negotiate individually with their employers. Today we see a continued lack of political commitment to encouraging the increase of union membership. Even this morning the Prime Minister refused to commit to encouraging increased union membership. As head of the so-called 'workers' party', his lack of support for union participation is disappointing. Falling membership and decreased collective bargaining power only serve to negatively affect Australians' living standards. We need stronger unions today. Unions are their members. When the coalition and big business denigrate unions they are in fact attacking working people.

Today, more women than men are members of unions. Industry-wide bargaining is particularly important and relevant for employees in traditionally female-dominated industries. The face of modern unionism has changed, and, increasingly, union member are frontline workers in aged care, early childhood education and teaching. In that sense, I am perhaps the archetypal union thug. And I have been a proud union thug for 30 years.

By improving the bargaining power of workers, we are not going to see the Australian economy being shut down as a result of strike action, as Senator Rennick has asserted. It says a lot about the Liberal and National parties' lack of understanding about what matters to Australians that this is their primary focus.

Increasingly, we are seeing industries such as early childhood education and aged care being eroded as workers leave this sectors due to inadequate wages. Improving worker pay in sectors such as early childhood education and aged care would go a long way towards improving the current gender based economic inequity in Australia and ensuring that the deficiencies in workers wages do not force them into a cost-of-living crisis.

In focusing on the potential for strikes as the predominant issue facing our economy, Senator Rennick has demonstrated once again how the Liberals side with corporations rather than working people. Australians need wage rises now to deal with the increasing cost of living. Access to industry-wide bargaining is an essential element to ensure Australians' wages continue increasing to meet the demands of inflation and prevent a cost-of-living crisis. This is why the adoption of industry-wide bargaining is so important. Instead of being scared of the potential for strikes, we should be scared of the impacts the cost-of-living crisis will have on Australians. Fearing strikes cannot be the perennial reason for a lack of support for union strength, increasing union membership and expanding workers' rights. Stronger unions are an essential part of ensuring all workers receive equitable wages and fair working conditions.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm going to take issue with what the previous speaker has just said, because Australia cannot afford a backward step into the past. Anybody who lived through the 1970s and the 1980s would remember that there was no risk of an economy-wide shut down; there was action taken in support of economy-wide shutdowns! It would appear that this is something that is missed by so many on the other side. Without a doubt, the deal that has been done between the Albanese Labor government and the ACTU well and truly shows that under Mr Albanese as Prime Minister of Australia the Australian Labor Party are beholden—nothing more and nothing less—to the union movement.

But what is worse is that they are actually paying back their paymaster. When you look at the threat of damaging industrial action—and that is what this is designed to do—the Albanese Government is about to deliver that in full to Australians. Anybody who understands the history of the industrial relations act would understand that this type of behaviour was actually ruled out and made illegal by the former Keating government. In fact, even former Labor prime ministers—former Prime Minister Rudd and former Prime Minister Gillard—recognised the need to ensure that this type of behaviour did not return. They were pressed on the ACTU at the time, they were pressed by the union movement, but they stood their ground. They stood their ground and they refused to capitulate. Why? Because they understood that the last thing that Australia needed under their Labor governments was a return to the dark old days of economy wide shutdowns.

Again, what is conveniently missed by those opposite in this debate is that under Labor's Fair Work Act—the Fair Work Act that was put together under the former Rudd and Gillard governments—multiemployer bargaining is actually allowed. Two employers can get together, if they want, and they can bargain for an enterprise agreement. What they also forget to tell the Australian people is that under Labor's Fair Work Act—which they are now saying is just not working, and they certainly didn't say that the last time they were in government—there is also a low-paid bargaining stream. Again, what that does is permit multiemployer bargaining for low-paid workers. So, despite everything that those opposite are saying, Labor's Fair Work Act, as it currently stands—the act that they designed—already allows multiemployer bargaining, and already allows multiemployer bargaining for low-paid workers. In fact, when you look at why, under the former Labor government, this was actually inserted, the stream was designed for sectors such as aged-care and community services—the very sectors that the ACTU constantly refers to in arguing for an industry bargaining system.

So you do need to ask yourself: if Labor's Fair Work Act, the Fair Work Act that was put in place by the former Labor government, at this point in time currently allows for multiemployer bargaining but also has the ability for employees to get together in terms of the low-paid bargaining stream, why is Labor making announcements with the ACTU that they would like to introduce multiemployer bargaining? Because we know that under the current streams you can't take strike action. So the only change that Labor are putting forward under the guise of allowing this type of bargaining, because it is already allowed under the Fair Work Act, is to acquiesce to their paymasters, the Australian union movement, and to allow industrial action, economy-wide shutdowns, under the Albanese government.

Those who lived through the dark old days of the 1970s and 1980s will recall that, during those periods of time, industrial action was actually unlawful, but that did not stop people. You had general strikes, you had airline strikes, you had public transport strikes, you had beer strikes, you had waterfront strikes and you also had retail strikes. When Mr Albanese says that he would like to deliver full employment, real wage increases and productivity gains, and that that is what the summit is going to deliver, Blind Freddie could tell you that full employment, real wage increases and productivity gains are not going to be realised if the Albanese government legislates the ACTU's demands for sector-wide bargaining.

You will also be able to have sympathy strikes. You can actually have all sorts of workplaces that have no relationship whatsoever with those who are seeking to go out on strike also able to go on strike. You could have workers in New South Wales taking industrial action, and workers in my home city of Perth would be able to go on strike in support of them. Tell me: when a business is forced to close because its workers are on strike, how does that deliver full employment? How does that deliver real wage increases? How does that deliver productivity gains? Ultimately, that is what Mr Albanese said the summit would deliver, and yet all we have seen so far is a talkfest, a glorified networking event, and then some window-dressing for decisions that, by and large, have already been made by the Albanese government to appease their union paymasters.

On that note, it is a fact that unions currently represent less than 10 per cent of the private sector workforce. Yet when you look at how many of them were invited to the summit, they had around 33 seats at the summit table. Small businesses, on any analysis, represent the backbone of the Australian economy, are well and truly the job makers of our economy and represent 41 per cent of our workforce. But Australians might be interested to know they had one seat at the table. Despite all of the rhetoric that we are hearing from Prime Minister Albanese—'I'm pro worker, I'm pro employer'—small businesses, representing 41 per cent of our workforce, had one seat at the summit, and unions, who represent less than 10 per cent of the private sector workforce, had over 25 per cent of the seats at the summit.

In life, it's a very simple equation: a business that has to close employs no-one. That is what we are going to see if and when Labor go down the path of legislating the ACTU's demands of industry-wide bargaining. Imagine the impact that strikes will have on supply chains. Supply chains under the Albanese government will be absolutely crushed. What happens when you destroy a supply chain? It leads to instability in workplaces. When you have instability in workplaces, what do you end up with? Higher unemployment, less profitability within businesses and a negative impact all over the Australian economy.

What are families and businesses looking for from the Albanese government? They're actually looking for a plan to address the rising cost of living. And yet what they have been given by the Albanese government? A government that is showing it's actually not interested in addressing the rising cost of living. Even after 100 days, we still have not seen anything concrete put forward that would do just that. But what we have seen is that it is more than happy to capitulate to and entertain outrageous demands from the ACTU. And as I said: general strikes, airline strikes, public transport strikes, beer strikes, waterfront strikes and retail strikes—that is what this government is going to deliver to the Australian people. That is not a plan to address the cost of living.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thought Senator Rennick's contribution was going to be the most unhinged part of this debate, but Senator Cash well and truly took over from that.

I want to acknowledge Michele O'Neil from the ACTU, who is in here, as well as Robert from the ASU. I gather they're here to hear Senator White's first speech. She is a really good unionist and, at the same time, someone who will make a fantastic contribution to the Senate.

There are plenty of things I'm happy about with the election win. Obviously being in government and having the opportunity to change the country is significant, but I'm also pleased that the opposition kept Senator Cash in that portfolio because it is a real reminder to workers about who is on the side of the workers in this chamber. What if you went up to Australians now and asked: 'What was the last election about? What was a really significant thing? What did Albo really stand for in the election campaign?' I think they'd say, 'He wanted to see workers get a pay rise.' He was attacked for that by the now opposition. He was attacked for that in the media. But if you look at our record and what we have done in government, that is absolutely what we are focused on.

The first act of the Albanese Labor cabinet was to support a wage rise for those on the minimum wage. We've also seen a commitment when it comes to aged-care workers and support for them to get a wage rise once that decision is made. So there is absolutely no doubt for the Australian people, and it's only further emphasised by the unhinged attack on the Jobs and Skills Summit that we've seen from the opposition. Those opposite still don't get it: we are on the side of workers; we are proud to be on the side of workers and we want to deliver for workers as part of an Albanese Labor government.

It also shows that those opposite have learned nothing from the election campaign. They took no lessons from the election campaign. The Jobs and Skills Summit was about bringing people together. It was about trying to seek common ground. No-one involved in labour relations in this country thinks that the current system is working. That was clear in the lead-up, it was clear at the summit itself, and that's why we want to work together. It says so much about this opposition that they've completely missed the mark on that. They have failed to understand what our motivation is and why we are seeking to bring Australians together on this.

The Jobs and Skills Summit did not culminate on Thursday or Friday last week; there is ongoing work that will continue to happen. Also, it was about the lead-up work that was done by the government, the round tables that we had. I think there were almost 100 round tables held in different geographic regions, with different industries, and that led to the optimism that we saw on display on Thursday and Friday. We're all part of getting out there and listening. The Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, and I are in Rockhampton and on the Sunshine Coast. We had round tables; we involved local workforces, councils, unions. We wanted to ensure that we heard from a broad cross-section of the community.

Last week I was in Roma and did a community lunch with about 30 or 40 people from Roma, in western Queensland. They were excited and were openly talking about what the Jobs and Skills Summit would bring and the opportunities it would bring for regional and rural Australia as well. Then, on Wednesday before the jobs summit I was at the Business Council of Australia dinner, where the Prime Minister was the guest speaker. Those business leaders could not leave quickly enough to get to Canberra because they wanted to be part of the conversation as well. They took in the right spirit what this government is trying to achieve by working constructively with people.

What is the opposition so upset about? Why are they so unhinged? Why are we getting this ridiculous scare campaign of Senator Cash saying it's going to take us back to the 1950s or 1960s? No-one is advocating that. All we are wanting to see is that workers get a fair go and that they can bargain effectively to get a pay rise. But, as part of that, what we all want to see is the economic system working for the advantage of workers and also those people who want an increase in productivity at the same time. So it is completely reasonable for this government to go about consulting with people to find the best way forward and to try to work constructively where that happens and ensure that we can take the country forward as a result. That is why we were elected. That is how we intend to govern, and I think the Australian people are seeing a government that is committed to listening, that is committed to consulting and that is committed to working with everyone in the best interests of Australia.

It shouldn't be revolutionary. That's actually how governments of all persuasions should act. But the fact is it is revolutionary, because for 10 years we saw none of it. We saw 10 years of deliberate low wages because that was actually a deliberate design feature of the economy that the former finance minister set. This government is committed to turning that around. We're committed, where possible, to working with all cross-sections of the economy to ensure that we can achieve these goals and achieve these gains, and the Jobs and Skills Summit was a key part of that. But their reaction is absolutely illustrative of the response from those opposite. They are failing to see the direction that this government is taking and failing to see the support of the Australian people for wanting to take the country in this direction. They are missing the mark. They are reverting to their same old scare campaigns. It isn't going to work, and it isn't going to distract us from achieving the goals that we want to achieve.

If you look at the last decade, real wages have gone backwards in this country. The opposition, whilst in government, spent 10 years looking for every opportunity they had to attack workers. We saw from Senator Cash, when she was a minister, the attack on unions and raids on union offices. They had antiworker legislation that they tried to introduce under the cover of the pandemic as well. Now, instead of focusing on the positives of bringing Australians together at the Jobs and Skills Summit, they are trying to run a desperate scare campaign, and we've seen that in their contributions to this MPI. They haven't learnt that the Australian people want an opposition who are constructive, one that will work with the government to improve legislation, as we did in the previous parliament. The Australian business community understands that. The social welfare sector understands that. The unions understand that. But it's something that the opposition is still failing to heed. The Albanese Labor government know that we need to get wages moving again. That is why we were so focused on the Jobs and Skills Summit being a success. We know how important this is to the Australian people, and those people have been doing it tough after 10 years of no wages growth.

But, despite the opposition's scare campaigns, this was a summit that brought together governments, employers, unions and the broader community, including David Littleproud as the National Party leader. The summit came up with a solution to build a bigger and better trained and more productive workforce that's focused on boosting real wages and living standards while creating more opportunities for Australians as well. The one thing that all sides agreed on is that we needed a new approach and that the current industrial relations system isn't working. The Albanese Labor government has listened and is acting. We will legislate to create more flexibility for workers and businesses to reach agreement and get wages moving. We are making changes to close loopholes in the Fair Work Act, loopholes that allow wages to go down. Instead of looking for solutions, the opposition are running the same tired scare campaigns that they did in government. They aren't wanting to work together to improve the system so that it's working for businesses and workers and we can increase productivity and improve wages. They talked a lot about small business, but the fact is that the small business council of Australia were represented. What they said and what Alexi Boyd said was: 'What we're hearing from our members is some of them are saying that this is something they would like to look into.' It's as simple as that. So we have seen some constructive comments from the small business community.

As the Prime Minister said this morning on ABC radio:

I see myself as pro-business and pro-worker. I see that there is common interest between business and unions, that Australia works best when we're all headed in the one direction, when there's that spirit of cooperation, and that is the spirit which I wish to foster. That's the spirit that I saw in evidence over the two days of the summit.

You can see the clear contrast there of a government that wants to make progress on these issues, because we understand how important they are for the Australian people. We want to see unions being able to represent their workers and being able to achieve success for their workers in terms of productivity, in terms of wages and in terms of job conditions. We also understand that we need businesses to thrive at the same time, and that's what bringing people together at a summit will achieve. None of the nonsense that we've seen from those opposite is going to achieve anything. We are going to be focused on delivering for Australian workers, on delivering for the Australian community. Workers of Australia will know that an Albanese Labor government is absolutely on their side and we will always be on their side.

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is a great matter of public concern. As inflation and cost of living skyrockets Australian workers were hoping for a pay rise to keep up. Instead, the Albanese government is using the Jobs and Skills Summit as cover for flooding the country with unsustainable immigration levels. Prime Minister Albanese's immigration flood will increase the number of workers looking for work and that will keep Australian wages down. What a sick joke, the Labor Party increasing immigration to suppress wages as its way of fighting for the workers. Pretending to care about workers is a signature of the Albanese government's approach. Instead of pretence, we need comprehensive reform in this country.

The Fair Work Act, which I am showing you here, is a mammoth, complex, confusing patchwork of red tape that gives small businesses nightmares and leaves workers, like casual workers in Central Queensland and the Hunter, without basic protections and entitlements. Senator Chisolm was correct when he said that everyone knows it is a problem. It certainly is a problem. Instead of this we need simple, effective industrial relations reform that doesn't just benefit the IR club of union bosses, lawyers and multinational companies.

Next, we turn to the Albanese government's key strategy, the government's apparent intention to adopt industrywide bargaining. It will sledgehammer Australian businesses, especially small business, and it will sledgehammer workers. If the Albanese government proceeds with this repackaged pattern bargaining untold damage will be done to our economy. This isn't speculation. This has been done before. It has all happened before.

A 2002 a Productivity Commission inquiry found that just two industrial disputes in the automotive industry the year before cost $630 million in lost production. In today's dollars that is more than $1 billion. It's worth explaining what this damage could mean. Currently, if workers want to go on strike against a particular company, as is their right—like the Qantas baggage handlers' strike happening right now—criteria must be met for the strike to be lawful. That's Qantas baggage handlers striking for benefits from Qantas. In industrywide bargaining the Qantas strike would automatically allow Virgin staff to go on strike, even though their pay, conditions and employer are completely different. Industry bargaining means entire industries can be shut down even if there's only one company treating employees poorly. Imagine one cafe having a strike and that automatically triggering strikes across the hospitality industry, even if cafes are already paying their employees well and treating them fairly.

Paralysing entire industries because of disputes with one employer in that industry is reckless and in the long run will harm workers. It is done as a reward for union bosses donating tens of millions of dollars to Labor's election campaign. In return the Prime Minister gives union bosses more power so they can continue to betray honest union members in deals with multinationals. The Labor Party continues to abandon Australian workers. One Nation will continue to fight for workers and small businesses. (Time expired)

Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have great pleasure today in rising to contribute to this very important MPI. I note that it didn't take too long for this government to be able to come here and be up to their old tricks. In fewer than 100 days they're up to their old tricks. Already they're demonstrating that, really, it's just their union mates, their paymasters, who are in charge. On the back of channelling the former Hawke government with a summit of words and no action, now the government has heeded the union's clarion call for industry-wide bargaining power. Never mind the inflation crisis, which is an issue that all Australians are facing, along with high interest rates and spiralling cost-of-living pressures. No, this government is intent, post talkfest, on ensuring that unions are happy running amok in the Australian workplace. Businesses and industries of all sizes are rightly concerned at this sudden development. Why? Because, through industry-wide bargaining, unions may seek to weaponise strike action once again through protected action.

This should alarm everyone. The risk of economy-wide shutdown is a regression back to the 1970s and 1980s, which Australians in this generation, and now for a couple of generations, have never experienced and wouldn't want to. Be in no doubt: industrial striking is an instrument of sector-wide bargaining. You don't have to go far to see the damaging impacts that strike action had on the Australian economy in the 1970s, when industry-wide strikes were common and the Australian industry was protected by high tariff barriers.

Data assembled by Dr Jim Stanford indicates that in the 1970s the average number of industrial disputes each year was 2,300, yet in the period of 2010 to 2018 there was an average of 198. You only have to remember the dire state in Britain in the 1970s when strike action was out of control and crippling the British economy. It culminated with the famous winter of discontent. 'Crisis—what crisis?' yelled the British press during the dying days of a British Labor government.

Now in 2022 it's back to the future again. In New South Wales we're seeing the rail strikes, particularly in Sydney, while up in Brisbane the CFMMEU is flexing its muscle and picketing in the CBD. It's also calling for industrial action at airports, which would pose a significant threat to an industry that is already precarious because of the COVID pandemic. We know what the disruption has been in that industry. The last thing they need is to have that compounded by further industrial action.

Nothing emboldens unions more than the ascent to office of a federal Labor government, and that's what we're seeing right now. In the past, the Labor Party rejected the coalition's modest changes to the better off overall test. Interestingly, a 4 September 2022 Australian Financial Review article quoted former Prime Minister Paul Keating as saying that the BOOT is overprescriptive, while former ACTU secretary Bill Kelty said it was crazy.

This government should work with the coalition to ensure that the Australian workplace remains harmonious. Our economy depends on this, colleagues. Our economy depends on this. This is the last thing that we would want to see. We cannot revert back to the bleak days of a bygone era. The last thing that this country needs during an environment of high inflation, high interest rates, increasing interest rates and out-of-control costs of living is unions gridlocking the Australian economy. It is for these reasons that I support this motion here today.

Who is in charge of the agenda of this government? Who is in charge of the progression of our economy? It seems to be the unions. The unions were in force at the summit last week. There were over 30 union officials, 33 or 34. Yet there were only seven Western Australians present at that meeting. So who's in charge? Who's listening to the interests of the economy, listening to the interests of those that are creating the jobs and have actually got the jobs to make available for Australians? Sadly, that's what we're seeing. We're seeing that the unions are in control. This lot over here—those are their paymasters and that's what's happening.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What we are seeing here in the Senate today is yet another attempt by the coalition to attack workers at a time when their side of the economy, the capital, is extracting ever more money from the economic system and workers are seeing even less in their pockets. It is no wonder we have seen this motion moved by the coalition. They did not attend the jobs summit, they are bereft of positive ideas, so they come in here with a scare campaign that industry-wide bargaining is somehow going to cause sector-wide strikes and industrial chaos when, in fact, what we know is it will produce is fair wages, particularly for those feminised parts of our workforce, those with the least bargaining power, those which need the most help at the moment to deal with the cost-of-living crisis.

It is no wonder the coalition come in here with a scare campaign. They are happy because profits are up, and shareholders are doing well. Profits are up, CEO bonuses are bigger than ever, and they are happy—tick! But while profits are up, wages are stagnant. Right now we know that an ever-smaller percentage of the national pie is going towards workers in the form of wages yet more and more profits are being delivered to shareholders, CEOs and senior executives, and we have an obligation to rebalance the system so it goes some way to delivering a fair go. Allowing unions to properly represent their workers with pay deals that deliver consistent rates across employers is not something to be afraid of. It is called fairness; it is called equity. I know that is what scares the coalition. But for most of the rest of the country, it is what they want the industrial relations system to deliver—fairness, equity and a growth in real wages.

Small businesses and others that pay their workers fairly aren't concerned about these moves to put workers on a fairer footing. Isolating workers in some workplaces, particularly those with less bargaining power, has been the history of the last 30 years. What that means is that workers with less power, like those in feminised industries—the care industry, services industries—miss out on the better wages and conditions negotiated in workplaces with greater union density and greater ability to put economic pressure on the system. If change doesn't happen, those workers who have been left behind for the last 30 years will be left behind for the next 30 years, and the gap between the haves and the have-nots in this society will rise and rise.

A minority of employers and their friends in the coalition are still pushing to have workers fragmented, unable to bargain together, because they recognise that workers coming together and fairly bargaining will see wages form a greater share of the economy. Workers looking at their pay cheques over the last decade have seen precious little growth and, often, reductions in the real wages they are bringing home, all the more so as we see inflation rise with cost-of-living pressures. It makes the astronomical housing prices in Australia and the growing cost of living a real and ongoing threat, and this parliament has an obligation to respond.

What we do know is that our economy is more dominated than ever by the services and care industries, and this is something the ACTU has said clearly in making the case for industry-wide bargaining. As the economy has changed, we still have an industrial relations system that is 30 years old, that has failed to take into account those fundamental changes, particularly for those workers in smaller workplaces in the care sectors, often workplaces that are dominated by women. They need to have the ability to engage in collective bargaining and it is best done on an industry-wide level. As the President of the ACTU said, allowing workers to band together across workplaces to bargain is an essential way of getting wages moving again after a lost decade of flatlining wages and real wage cuts. It should be unacceptable to all of us that real wage cuts are projected year on year.

We will not get meaningful movement on wages unless we can move on industry-wide bargaining. It scares the coalition but, I have to tell you, there are workers out there who have had 30 years of flatlining wages who are desperately keen for this parliament to do more than carp and complain but actually give them power, give them a fair wage and finally see a fair share of the pie going to those workers who deliver. (Time expired)