House debates

Wednesday, 24 May 2006

Workplace Relations Regulations


9:52 am

Photo of Phillip BarresiPhillip Barresi (Deakin, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

In fact, skilled migration was not introduced by me into the debate on this motion; it was introduced by the member for Brand. Extreme language was not introduced by me; it was introduced by those on the other side. The motive behind this disallowance motion is very much what I am talking about. The motivation is that they need to muscle up.

This motion represents nothing more than a final attempt to delay the implementation of the Work Choices act. It is simply a last-ditch effort by the opposition when they know that the Work Choices legislation is being embraced by the Australian community. The ALP’s last-ditch effort is just a sham. The member for Perth is under pressure. He claims that this legislation is an attack on unions, that we on this side believe that unions will have no role as a result of this legislation. It is an exaggerated position and one which would be great for the union movement to hear. It is wrong. The unions’ role, as evidenced at Beaconsfield—and I take my hat off to the AWU—will continue to exist and is very appropriate. There is nothing in this Work Choices legislation that will prevent that role from taking place. In fact, I would say to the union movement that they will have greater opportunities to show their relevance in the industrial relations setting because of this legislation.


No comments