Kim Beazley (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1)

recalls and records the solemn commitment given by the Prime Minister to Alan Jones on Radio 2GB on 4 August 2005 that “I mean some people are going to have to work public holidays…it would be absurd and unfair and unreasonable if somebody has to work on a public holiday that that person isn’t compensated by being paid whatever it is, the double time or the time and a half…those arrangements are going to continue…”;

(2)

notes that appropriate compensation includes things like penalty rates and public holiday leave loadings;

(3)

notes that since the Government’s extreme industrial relations changes commenced on 27 March 2006, a single sentence in an Agreement can remove all entitlements to public holiday pay, penalty rates and overtime pay, and that the Government’s own statistics show:

(a)

64 per cent of assessed AWAs have removed penalty rates;

(b)

63 per cent have removed leave loadings;

(c)

52 per cent have removed shiftwork loadings; and

(d)

41 per cent did not contain gazetted public holidays;

(4)

affirms its support for the Prime Minister’s August 2005 commitment that employees should receive adequate compensation for working on public holidays; and

(5)

calls on the Government to immediately restore adequate compensation for Australian employees who work on public holidays, thereby holding the Prime Minister to his solemn promise to Alan Jones and the Australian people.

This will be the 21st time by motion, by censure motion and by MPI that this chamber will have debated issues relating to the industrial relations system introduced by the government, at the Prime Minister’s behest, in which the Prime Minister has not participated. He has squibbed every single debate in this chamber since this legislation was introduced. As the nation has had an opportunity to see the full impact of his handiwork, he has been unprepared in open debate in this chamber to explain himself and explain what he is up to. Quite frankly, for a major piece of legislation on the part of a government, I cannot recollect a set of circumstances where a Prime Minister has been so reluctant to debate its detail after its point of entry and implementation. Prime ministers have usually deigned to come into this chamber at least once or twice to defend the principal handiwork of their government. The Prime Minister has not chosen to do so and he is too cowardly to face us outside, so it needs to be comprehended thoroughly by all members of this chamber and all Australians.

See this speech in context