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

My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. Minister, is it not the case that the Office of the Employment Advocate has officially advised employees of Aboriginal Hostels Ltd, in a letter dated 6 October:

Employees wanted to know whether or not they could negotiate a new collective agreement with Aboriginal Hostels Limited instead of AWAs. The short answer is no. The employer decides what type of agreement they will use. The employer chooses what agreements they will offer and what they will negotiate.

Can the minister point out to the hundreds of thousands of Australians who marched against the government’s extreme and unfair industrial relations laws today where the choice is in that?

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

The first thing I will say to the member for Perth is that I will check the facts because every other time you come in here, mate, you mislead! We had the member for Perth in here yesterday misleading the parliament about the situation at the Commonwealth Bank. He was caught red-handed a few weeks ago in relation to electrical contractors here in Canberra. If there is anybody who has come in here more often and misled the parliament, I wonder who it could be.

Peter Costello (Higgins, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Costello interjecting

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

Yes. It is a bit of a contest between the roosters as to who misleads this place the most. The first thing I say is that the member for Perth has now built a reputation in this place for simply not coming here and telling the whole truth, so I will check out the matter. The second thing is, and the member for Perth would know this—

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order as to standing order 104.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister is answering the question and the minister is in order.

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

If the member for Perth were bothered to bone up on industrial relations 101, instead of wasting his time trying to prop up the Leader of the Opposition or making the silly excuses he did this morning as to why there were only 45,000 people at the MCG  and not the 100,000 as claimed—and he said that was because they could not catch a train! I bet they will be able to catch a train to get to the Boxing Day test. I caught a train to get to the grand final. So enough of these silly excuses. The fact is, you have egg all over your face.

Paul Neville (Hinkler, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is addressed to the Acting Prime Minister and Minister for Transport and Regional Services. Would the Acting Prime Minister inform the House how industrial relations reform under the coalition government has strengthened our economy and boosted jobs in regional Australia? Would the Acting Prime Minister also advise us whether predictions about past reforms have proven to be correct?

Mark Vaile (Lyne, National Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Hinkler for his question. The member for Hinkler, representing a couple of very important ports in Queensland, would recognise that many of the predictions about previous reforms have been proven to be totally incorrect and that the reforms introduced by our government over the years, particularly with regard to the efficiency of ports, have certainly been achieved. I give the example of the waterfront reform that was undertaken by this government, which has significantly boosted the competitiveness and efficiency of our export industries and has seen crane rates in our container ports in 2006 go up to 27.7 movements per hour. In 1996 they were 16.9 movements per hour. Just as every other prediction by the Australian Labor Party and the union movement about reform in the workplace has been proven to be incorrect, they said this could not be done. They said you could not improve upon crane rates of 16.9 lifts per hour. Well, we have; that has taken place. The Australian Labor Party and the union movement have said in their scare campaign about Work Choices that this is about slashing wages, that it is about reducing levels of employment, that it is a green light for mass sackings—all the emotive lines that have been used in their scare campaign that continued today.

The reality is that unemployment in Australia has hit a record low of 4.6 per cent. In the last 10 years, 1.9 million new jobs have been created in the economy in Australia. In that period, real wages have increased by 16.5 per cent. Since Work Choices was introduced, 165,000 new jobs have been created in the marketplace. Interestingly, 62 per cent of areas in regional Australia now have unemployment levels of lower than five per cent. We all remember what unemployment was like in regional Australia under the administration of the last Labor government. The Labor Party and the union movement—the ACTU—will continue their scare campaign, but the working men and women of Australia recognise what has taken place in this country under the coalition government to improve their circumstances, living standards and the economy in Australia. They recognise that the most important point is the real wage increase over the last 10 years of 16.5 per cent, which is the very reason they believe that the coalition government is a true friend of Australia’s workers.

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

My question to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations follows his claim, in the answer to the previous question asked of him, about the member for Perth misleading in the questions he asks in this place. On the subject of misleading, minister: where in this document of your election policy did you indicate what you intended to do on penalty rates? Where in this document did you indicate to the Australian people what you intended to do about unfair dismissals? Where in this document did you indicate what you intended to do about the status of the independent umpire? Where in this document did you state what you intended to do about people’s right to be appropriately represented by a union? Talk about misleading! Where in this serially misleading document did you tell the Australian people anything about the attacks you intended to make on their family life?

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I call the minister, I would remind the Leader of the Opposition that he should address his questions through the chair.

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

The one thing that most disappoints the Leader of the Opposition is that his predictions have been proven totally wrong. This is the man who has waltzed around Australia for the last 12 or 18 months telling Australians that jobs would be destroyed as a result of Work Choices. What happened? He is wrong. Jobs have gone up. This is the man and the labour movement that has waltzed around Australia saying that Work Choices would be a green light—

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms King interjecting

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Ballarat!

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

for slashing wages in Australia. Can I remind the House and the Leader of the Opposition of the thing that he said was not going to happen.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What did you say?

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Ballarat is warned!

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

He said that the Fair Pay Commission was not going to increase wages; it was going to decrease wages. Can I remind him that tomorrow, 1 December, the Australian Fair Pay Commission will deliver a $27 increase in the weekly wages of the million lowest paid Australians. That is the outcome.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Has the minister has completed his answer?

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

Yes.

Stuart Henry (Hasluck, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is addressed to the Treasurer. Would the Treasurer outline to the House the benefits of reforming the nation’s workplace? How could this process be damaged by alternative proposals?

Peter Costello (Higgins, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the honourable member for Hasluck for his question. I can tell him that reforming industrial relations is one of the reasons unemployment is now at a 30-year low in Australia at 4.6 per cent. The ACTU had its big demonstrations against Work Choices today. According to Sharan Burrow, there were 60,000 at the MCG. According to Billy Shorten, there were slightly above 50,000 at the MCG. According to the ABC, there were 40,000 at the MCG. The member for Lilley went on Charles Wooley’s program and claimed: ‘There aren’t many occasions in Australian history where a political meeting has 70,000, 80,000 or 90,000 people as they had in Melbourne.’

The lesson to draw from that is: never trust an estimation of the numbers from the member for Lilley. That is my advice to the Leader of the Opposition: never trust an estimation of numbers from the member for Lilley. I have been to a few grand finals in my time at the MCG. Let me tell you, this was no Essendon-Collingwood match. This was no Anzac Day crowd; this was a VFA turnout. The excuses are now coming: ‘The trains were off, so we couldn’t get a train’ or, as Greg Combet said, people were afraid of repercussions. Let me tell you, lots of people had lots of reasons not to be there. Former ACTU president Bob Hawke was not there. That is because he is in France hunting French deer with the hounds. According to Country Life magazine:

At this year’s meet in the oak forests of Champlevois in the Loire,  the crossroads were named after Mr Hawke and he made an acceptance speech surrounded by the hounds.

It is a great country, this! You can start off as a working-class hero and finish your days hunting with the hounds in the Loire Valley, as many of those at the MCG did.

Here is the figure to get in your minds: since Work Choices came into effect, 165,000 new jobs have been created in Australia. Get this figure in your mind: since Work Choices came into effect, four times the crowd at the MCG has been created in new jobs. That is 165,000 new jobs. Four times the number that rolled out at the MCG today have found work with new jobs as a consequence of Work Choices. The truth of the matter is that today was a political stunt. It flopped. Today will not interrupt the creation of new jobs. Today we continue with economic reform in Australia.

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Childcare) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. I refer to his extreme ‘No Choice’ workplace laws. How does the minister reconcile his personal beliefs and family values with the fact that these laws make it impossible for families to plan to spend time together?

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

If that is the best they can come up with, they are getting pretty desperate! What families today want is to have flexibility in their working arrangements. That is what families want. Yesterday the member for Perth and the Leader of the Opposition paraded the example of the Commonwealth Bank. The Commonwealth Bank, as part of these changes, are able to provide more flexibility in employment. They are trying to employ people on weekends. They have 700 places available. Do you know how many people have applied for those 700 jobs which involve work on a Saturday morning when the banks will be open, which will be more family friendly as well? Two thousand three hundred people have applied for those 700 jobs.

The contrast here is very stark. The contrast is between providing flexibility that employees want in the workplace and the inflexible, rigid system—the one-size-fits-all system—which the Labor Party want to take us back to in Australia. The reality is that Australian workers and their families are voting with their feet and they have rejected your proposition.

Cameron Thompson (Blair, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. Could the minister update the House on how the government’s workplace relations reforms are benefiting Australian families? Is the minister aware of any alternative views?

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms Macklin interjecting

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is warned!

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

I thank the member for Blair for his question. The changes put in place since 27 March have led to very significant benefits for Australians, Australian workers and Australian families. We have seen jobs growth, wages growth, record low industrial disputation, record low retrenchments in Australia, a 20-year long-term unemployment rate low and strong productivity growth.

Let me take a little bit of the economic data about what has happened in the last six to eight months in Australia. For example, as the Treasurer has said, 165,000 Australians are in new jobs since 27 March this year, and 129,000 of those jobs are full-time jobs. But let me give you the significance of that historically. The job creation average for the last 20 years was just 70,000 jobs, and yet we have seen 165,000 jobs created since Work Choices was introduced this year. There is a 30-year unemployment low of 4.6 per cent.

We have wages continuing to grow. As I said earlier, tomorrow the lowest paid workers in Australia—one million of them—will get something which the Leader of the Opposition, the Labor Party and the labour movement said would not happen, because they said this was about driving down wages. Tomorrow, the one million lowest paid Australian workers will get a $27 increase in their pay packet. That is good news for Australian workers; it is something which the Labor Party said was not going to happen. We have the lowest levels of industrial disputes on record—and records in one form or another go back to before Gallipoli.

What did the Leader of the Opposition say? He said that the changes would lead to a situation where employers and employees would be at each other’s throats. Indeed, the contrary has occurred. We have a record low number of job retrenchments—the lowest for two decades in Australia—and long-term unemployed figures are also at 20-year lows.

When you cut away the rhetoric of the opposition and the labour movement about this and look not just at the anecdotal evidence but at the official ABS data about what has happened in Australia, all of that data points to benefits for Australian workers and their families as a result of these changes. Yet we still have the Leader of the Opposition maintaining this scare campaign down there at the MCG today, saying he is going to rip up changes that bring advantages for Australians into the future. All of his predictions have been proven false over the last six to eight months since Work Choices came into place.

Why does he want to do this? Because, in contrast to us—we are concerned about the national interest and how we continue to grow this country—the Leader of the Opposition is only interested in vested interests. He is only interested in his job, rather than jobs for all Australians. He is bitterly disappointed, I am sure, by the embarrassingly low turnout that they got at the MCG today. Look at all the excuses they are trying to make about why only half the number of people that they predicted were actually there. The reality is that these are changes which are good for Australia. This side of politics is prepared to make the decisions to ensure that Australia continues to grow. The only interest the other side has is: who is the Leader of the Opposition?

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

The one thing I predicted about this law is that it would be like an infestation of termites. Let us have a look at this infestation. My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations and it follows the question he was just asked about the impact of the law on family life. I refer to an Australian workplace agreement offered by confectionery manufacturer Australian Sweets to its employees which provides for work at any hour of the day on any day of the week without compensation for inconvenient hours. Why do you arrogantly ignore hundreds of thousands of Australians who told you today that AWAs like this one ruin their family life?

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

One thing that has become clear over the last few months is that, when the opposition has come in here and made claims about some particular agreement, those claims, when investigated, have not stood up. I do not accept for one moment any allegation or assertion made by the Leader of the Opposition. Yesterday he was in here making assertions about a Commonwealth Bank agreement which where totally untrue. A month ago we had the member for Perth in here making allegations about electrical contractors and electrical workers in Canberra which were proven to be totally untrue. You have no reputation with regard to this at all. If the Leader of the Opposition or the member for Perth wants to come in here and wave pages and pieces of paper around, I suggest they start with the Australian newspaper, in which their colleagues regarded the member for Perth as a ‘dud’.

Honourable Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Members are holding up their own question time.