Senate debates

Tuesday, 21 March 2017

Motions

Workplace Relations

4:50 pm

Photo of Lee RhiannonLee Rhiannon (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | | Hansard source

I ask that general business notice of motion No. 244 standing in my name for today relating to the role of civil disobedience in reducing economic and social inequality be taken as a formal motion.

Photo of Gavin MarshallGavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | | Hansard source

Is there any objection to this motion being taken as formal?

Honourable senators interjecting

Formality has been denied.

Photo of Katy GallagherKaty Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

I seek leave to make a short statement.

Photo of Gavin MarshallGavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | | Hansard source

Leave is granted for one minute.

Photo of Katy GallagherKaty Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

I will very briefly go back to the statement I made on the previous motion. The Labor Party sees this as a series of motions on the same issue and our position is that we will not be supporting any of them. The Leader of the Opposition has made it clear that the Labor Party does not agree with breaking the law. We are elected to this place to uphold the law. But we do believe that if the law is unjust or unfair then we should work to change the law. History has shown that changing the law does not happen on its own. It often requires people to campaign to make a case and to persuade others to elect people to places where they will fight for workers' rights. Our position on all three of these motions today remains the same.

4:51 pm

Photo of James McGrathJames McGrath (Queensland, Liberal National Party, Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister) Share this | | Hansard source

I seek leave to make a short statement.

Photo of Gavin MarshallGavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | | Hansard source

Leave is granted for one minute.

Photo of James McGrathJames McGrath (Queensland, Liberal National Party, Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister) Share this | | Hansard source

What we have just seen is confirmation that this is a Sally McManus protection racket. The Labor Party has admitted that they did not want to deal with any of the motions dealing with Sally McManus and the ACTU in terms of that torch that was shone on her comments when she admitted the truth that the union movement does not believe in the rule of law and that the chief unionist in Australia does not believe in the rule of law. What we have here is the Labor Party trying cover it up, trying to hide it and trying to pretend that this chief unionist did not make those comments. So we have the Labor Party denying formality to different parties here in relation to comments made by their chief banker and their chief organiser because this unionist told the truth for once. This is a protection racket for the ACTU. (Time expired)

4:53 pm

Photo of Scott LudlamScott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | | Hansard source

I also seek leave to make a brief statement.

Photo of Gavin MarshallGavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | | Hansard source

Leave is granted for one minute.

Photo of Scott LudlamScott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | | Hansard source

I thank the Senate. If this is a protection racket for the ACTU it is the most feeble thing I have ever seen. I am actually somewhat speechless that the Labor Party have thrown their trade union colleagues under a bus. We would not have an eight-hour working day in this country without civil disobedience and without industrial action that was considered highly illegal under the laws of the day. Where are you people?

The only thing more surprising has been the hysterical reaction of the Tories. Why not leave your law practice and get yourself elected and change the law? Your female colleagues would not even be allowed in this building or in this chamber or even have the vote without civil disobedience and without people who were willing to break the law at the time. We believe that this is a fundamental precept of democracy and it is an incredible display from both of the major parties this afternoon that the debate has come to this. (Time expired)