Senate debates

Friday, 1 December 2006

Independent Contractors Bill 2006; Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Independent Contractors) Bill 2006

In Committee

10:25 am

Photo of Eric AbetzEric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation) Share this | Hansard source

I do not want to delay this debate for too long, but through all the rhetoric of Senator Marshall there may have been two points that people may have taken as being true and they are demonstrably untrue. In relation to child labour—very emotive; undoubtedly a lot of people got sucked in by Senator Marshall’s comments—he would know full well, and he should know full well, that child labour laws are specifically the jurisdiction of the state governments. They are specifically excluded by this legislation. Therefore, any assertion being made about child labour laws against the Australian federal government or against this legislation is simply unsustainable and untrue. Indeed, as a former union official, he should know that in his own home state of Victoria a child needs to get a work permit from the state Labor government. Let us be quite clear on this. This legislation specifically upholds all the child labour law provisions in each of the states and territories. So to try to draw child labour laws into this debate is disgraceful, is dishonest and has no basis in fact whatsoever.

We then got the other tear-jerker about the poor cleaner: how would that poor cleaner be able to go to the Federal Magistrates Court? Filing in the Federal Magistrates Court will be about 40 per cent of the cost of filing in the New South Wales Industrial Relations Commission. The current fee structure of the New South Wales Industrial Relations Commission will cost a worker $1,916 to file an unfair contracts application and have the matter set down for a one-day hearing. In the federal jurisdiction that we are proposing it will only cost $769.

So once again we have deliberate misinformation being peddled by the former trade union officials in this place. If they are genuinely concerned about the plight of workers, they should go to the New South Wales state Labor government and say, ‘You should reduce the fees charged to poor workers who want to get access to the New South Wales Industrial Relations Commission and you should follow the lead of the Howard government—the friend of the workers—who have reduced these sorts of fees within the federal jurisdiction right down to $769 in comparison to state Labor’s $1,916.’

I will not delay the chamber any further—there are a lot of amendments still to be dealt with—but I will not allow senators opposite to deliberately muddy the waters and mislead the unsuspecting public. I will not respond to their empty rhetoric but, when they make points that are either deliberately or unwittingly untrue, I will respond because I think the Australian people are entitled to the truth in this debate.

Comments

No comments