Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Why did the government vote against implementing the Respect@Work report recommendation to establish a positive duty on employers to protect workers from sexual harassment in the workplace?

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Urban Infrastructure, Cities and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the shadow minister and the Prime Minister for the opportunity to respond to the question about the Respect@Work report.

The question goes particularly to positive duty. Recommendation 17 of the Respect@Work report, about positive duty, will require further consideration and consultation to examine the merits and to ensure that such a duty would operate effectively alongside duties that already exist under work health and safety laws and the Sex Discrimination Act. That includes ensuring that additional complexity is not created for those seeking to use the protections. Significant thought also needs to be given before providing the Australian Human Rights Commission with inquiry and regulatory powers for discrimination and harassment in addition to its existing dispute-resolution function.

I make the point that work is underway on all remaining recommendations. As the Prime Minister rightly said, 42 of the 55 recommendations have been either fully implemented or funded. The Morrison government has made significant progress on implementing the Respect@Work report recommendations and will continue to do so. Work is underway on all remaining recommendations, noting that four recommendations were of course directed at the private sector, not at government.

I want to assure the House, and to clear up the unfortunate confusion that may have been generated by the shadow minister's question: no recommendations have been rejected. I make that very clear: no recommendations have been rejected.