Senate debates

Tuesday, 29 November 2016

Bills

Building and Construction Industry (Improving Productivity) Bill 2013, Building and Construction Industry (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2013; In Committee

8:32 pm

Photo of Nick XenophonNick Xenophon (SA, Nick Xenophon Team) Share this | Hansard source

Several years ago, when the Labor government was still in office, I moved a Senate inquiry into 457 visas and issues of labour market testing were raised. There were some improvements made by the Labor government and they were welcome. I think there is scope for further improvement. I have difficulty supporting this particular amendment because of its breadth. It requires, under clause 1(2A)(d) that:

… the employer demonstrates that no Australian citizen or permanent resident is suitable for the job.

I am not sure how that test would work in a practical sense. I understand the sentiments behind it. It also requires that a significant proportion of significantly qualified and experienced Australian citizens are aware of the advertising. How would that work on a regional basis?

I honestly want to see many Australian citizens and Australian residents filling jobs, but I think it is acknowledged by most sides of politics that there is scope and there is a need for 457 visa holders to fill genuine skills shortages. I believe that this ought to be dealt with in terms of quite broad changes to the Migration Act and a strengthening of labour market testing requirements. In that regard, I think the work of Dr Joanna Howe of the University of Adelaide has been quite instructive in that regard in looking at sensible reforms in relation to this issue. I will be speaking shortly in relation to procurement issues. I think having locally procured materials will have a very significant impact on local jobs and jobs growth. I have seen an amendment that Senator Hinch as well as Senator Lambie and Senator Culleton have moved in respect of procurement. That is my reservation with respect to this particular amendment—it would actually not be workable in the form that it is. But I think that it does highlight the need for further reform of labour market testing requirements.

The CHAIR: The question is that the amendment moved by Senator Cameron on sheet 8006 be agreed to.

Comments

No comments