House debates

Wednesday, 9 August 2006

Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) (Consequential Amendments) Amendment Regulations 2006 (No 1)

Motion

9:01 am

Photo of Stephen SmithStephen Smith (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Industry, Infrastructure and Industrial Relations) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) (Consequential Amendments) Amendment Regulations 2006 (No 1), as contained in Select Legislative Instrument 2006 No. 50 and made under the Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Act 2005, the Bankruptcy Act 1966, the Federal Magistrates Act 1999, the Public Service Act 1999, and the Public Employment (Consequential and Transitional) Amendment Act 1999, be disallowed.

This is the last occasion on which the House will formally have the opportunity to tear up the government’s extreme industrial relations legislation. This is the last opportunity for this House formally to vote on the adverse repercussions of the government’s so-called Work Choices legislation. We had the legislation and the consequential legislation in November-December last year, we had the attempt by Labor to disallow the regulations made under the main act earlier this year and now there is a final opportunity for the House to reject and tear up the government’s extreme industrial relations legislation.

I suspect that that will not happen. What I suspect will happen is that every Liberal and National Party member in this place will again handcuff themselves to John Howard’s extreme industrial relations legislation. In division after division we have seen every Liberal and National Party member of this place handcuff themselves to the government’s legislation. This is not necessarily how they conduct themselves in their electorates. This is effectively the first occasion since the six-week winter recess that Labor has had the opportunity to debate industrial relations.

What do we often find about Liberal and National Party members in their electorates in a recess or generally? They are lions in their electorates and chickens in Canberra. Over the course of the winter recess they have quietly expressed to the Prime Minister that there are a few problems out there: people think this legislation is extreme; people think this legislation is unfair; people think this legislation attacks their wages, their penalty rates and their leave loadings. They have quietly whispered that to him—not with the same voice that they have whispered or shouted, ‘Petrol prices up and interest rates up.’ How has the Prime Minister responded? He has responded by saying: ‘I’m not for turning. I’ve been ideologically and politically committed to these changes for 20 or 30 years of my public life and I’m not for turning.’ So what do we find those Liberal and National Party members doing? We find them being lions in their electorates and chickens in Canberra.

Speaking of chickens, what attitude does the Treasurer have on these matters? John Howard summarised it nicely—

Comments

No comments