House debates

Tuesday, 20 June 2006

Questions without Notice

Workplace Relations

2:44 pm

Photo of Michael JohnsonMichael Johnson (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. Would the minister inform the parliament of how Australia will benefit from a single national system of workplace relations? Has such a system previously been supported by substantial people in the community? Is the minister aware of any alternative views?

Photo of Kevin AndrewsKevin Andrews (Menzies, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service) Share this | | Hansard source

I thank the member for Ryan for his question and his interest in workplace relations in Australia. It is true that the government believe that we should have one single national system of industrial relations. We believe that because it would reduce duplication, it would reduce complexity and it would reduce the cost and confusion for both employers and employees. The reality is that we have some 10 million Australians in work in Australia—the highest number historically—but thousands of different state and federal awards and pieces of legislation. There are six competing systems of industrial relations operating, which is costly, confusing and complex. The government are committed to reducing this burden.

I was asked by the member for Ryan whether there were any other significant figures who have supported one national system of industrial relations. As far back as 1972 the then Labor Prime Minister of Australia, Mr Whitlam, supported a national system of industrial relations. It was interesting, when I read the Workplace Express email recently, that the member for Perth had told an industrial relations society conference in South Australia just last Friday that it would ‘not be inappropriate’ for the ALP to contemplate a national system of industrial relations.

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

Make sure you say everything I said!

Photo of Kevin AndrewsKevin Andrews (Menzies, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service) Share this | | Hansard source

I hear the member for Perth interjecting. It was a bit like him running around to the business community in Australia in the last year saying it would not be inappropriate to have AWAs. I take it from that that the member for Perth is advocating that we have a national system and is joining with what the government wants to do. He is not the only one who would see a national system as being valid. Mr Combet, the Secretary of the ACTU, said last March:

We are not necessarily in principle hostile to having a more cogent and clear national system of industrial relations. I think the economic efficiency argument is quite clear.

That is what we on this side of the chamber have been saying month after month. If we can remove this duplication and cost, it will be of great benefit in productivity to businesses in Australia and therefore indirectly to the workers of Australia as well. We know that the architect of the Leader of the Opposition’s backflip on AWAs, Mr Robertson, the Secretary of Unions NSW, is implacably opposed to a national system of industrial relations in Australia. The question out there is this: who is going to write part of the ALP’s policy on industrial relations? Is it going to be the member for Perth, who was rolled on the last part of their policy, or is it going to be Mr Robertson, the leader as I understand it of the ‘gang of mobsters’—the ‘mob of gangsters’—in Sydney? Is it going to be the shadow spokesman for industrial relations or is he going to get rolled once again by the union bosses?

2:48 pm

Photo of Chris HayesChris Hayes (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister, and it refers to a matter before the New South Wales Industrial Relations Commission today about the Tooheys brewery at Lidcombe in New South Wales. Is the Prime Minister aware of comments by Shane Simpson, a driver for Tooheys, who said:

As of 31 July we are no longer employed ... We are out of pocket for all the good will. We leave here with no job and no form of good will.

Will the Prime Minister guarantee that the proposed independent contractors legislation protects the goodwill of a small business owner or will this just be another attack on living standards? Is this life under John Howard for truckies at Tooheys?

Photo of David HawkerDavid Hawker (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

Order! The last part of that question was not necessary.

Photo of John HowardJohn Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | | Hansard source

I thank the member for Werriwa for his question. Can I start by saying that the dispute between the truck drivers and Tooheys has absolutely nothing to do with the Work Choices legislation. I want to make that very clear. Can I also make this very clear. It is interesting, even ironic, that the member for Werriwa should be asking this question today, because the coalition party room has had quite an extensive debate on the independent contractors legislation. In fact, great care has been taken in the preparation of that legislation to look after the goodwill of the very people you ask the question on behalf of.