Sam Dastyari (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of the answers to questions that were asked today in question time, particularly the first two questions asked by Labor senators. I want to touch on issues regarding the use and misuse of 457 visas, particularly the issue of market labour market testing. The answer that was provided by the minister was largely around the notion that says: 'It's all going to be okay, even though labour market testing has been removed, because you can trust me; you can take my word for it.' I think that is a very worrying trend and a very worrying direction for us to be heading in with this policy. We have seen time and time again in recent debates in this chamber the misinformation, incorrect information, spin and slant being placed on what is being said. I worry very much that when we start removing protections like labour market testing it ends up becoming a race to the bottom, and that is not a good place for any of us to be.

I specifically want to draw the attention of this chamber to the concerns that we need to have when the minister tells us that we can take her word for it when looking at the situation with the ABCC and the unintended consequences that may or may not now result from the passing of that legislation. We heard from Senator Carr how deal after deal was cut and concession after concession was made in a desperate bid to get this legislation through. We read in the papers that there were random negotiations on matters that had nothing to do with the ABCC legislation, yet those deals were done.

I want to draw the attention of the Senate to the work of the Australian Services Union and the United Services Union, in particular, in trying to limit the scope of what was already a bad piece of legislation. The ABCC bill should not have been passed on its own merits, but the bill itself was made even worse by the minister's failure to clarify the scope of this legislation and what this legislation would mean—to clarify the scope of who would and would not be included. I draw the attention of the chamber to a letter sent on 30 May this year from Mr Robert Potter, at the time Acting National Secretary of the ASU, to Minister Cash, specifically asking whether or not employees in the construction industry in local government would be included and whether or not employees not in construction but in local government—we are talking about librarians, council workers—would be captured by the ABCC. There was no response from the minister, no response at all—not even the courtesy of sending a letter back. We have strong, powerful, important unions—that have been going out of their way to stand up for the rights of their members—unable to get any type of clarification on what the consequences of this legislation would be. The reality is that, perhaps, the government does not even know how far this legislation will reach.

I acknowledge the work of the National Secretary of the ASU, Dave Smith; the Acting Assistant National Secretary, Robert Potter; and the New South Wales Secretary, Graeme Kelly, as well as the many other ASU and USU officials across the country. I hope that when clarification is finally provided on the scope of this legislation we do not find a situation where council employees are being dragged into this. It is bad enough that construction workers are going to be treated as second class citizens; it would be even worse if that were extended to council employees as well. Frankly, when we look at the Building Code and the opportunities for review we need clarification. Unfortunately, the opportunity was not taken by the government to do it at this point. But, certainly, at a minimum, they need to remove the potential for council employees to be dragged into this mess.

Question agreed to.