Senate Official Hansard No

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

Senate Official Hansard No. 18, 2005 WEDNESDAY, 30 NOVEMBER 2005

FORTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—FOURTH PERIOD

BY AUTHORITY OF THE SENATE

INTERNET The Journals for the Senate are available at http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/work/journals/index.htm

Proof and Official Hansards for the House of Representatives, the Senate and committee hearings are available at http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard

For searching purposes use http://parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au

SITTING DAYS—2005 Month Date February 8, 9, 10 March 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17 May 10, 11, 12 June 14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 22, 23 August 9, 10, 11, 16, 17, 18 September 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15 October 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13 November 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 28, 29, 30 December 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

RADIO BROADCASTS Broadcasts of proceedings of the Parliament can be heard on the following Parliamentary and News Network radio stations, in the areas identified.

CANBERRA 103.9 FM SYDNEY 630 AM NEWCASTLE 1458 AM GOSFORD 98.1 FM BRISBANE 936 AM GOLD COAST 95.7 FM MELBOURNE 1026 AM ADELAIDE 972 AM PERTH 585 AM HOBART 747 AM NORTHERN TASMANIA 92.5 FM DARWIN 102.5 FM

FORTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—FOURTH PERIOD

Governor-General

His Excellency Major-General Michael Jeffery, Companion in the Order of Australia, Com- mander of the Royal Victorian Order, Military Cross

Senate Officeholders President—Senator the Hon. Paul Henry Calvert Deputy President and Chairman of Committees—Senator John Joseph Hogg Temporary Chairmen of Committees—Senators Guy Barnett, George Henry Brandis, Hedley Grant Pearson Chapman, Patricia Margaret Crossin, Alan Baird Ferguson, Michael George Forshaw, Stephen Patrick Hutchins, Linda Jean Kirk, Philip Ross Lightfoot, Gavin Mark Mar- shall, Claire Mary Moore, Andrew James Marshall Murray, Hon. Judith Mary Troeth and John Odin Wentworth Watson Leader of the Government in the Senate—Senator the Hon. Robert Murray Hill Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate—Senator the Hon. Nicholas Hugh Minchin Leader of the Opposition in the Senate—Senator Christopher Vaughan Evans Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate—Senator Stephen Michael Conroy Manager of Government Business in the Senate—Senator the Hon. Christopher Mar- tin Ellison Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate—Senator Joseph William Ludwig

Senate Party Leaders and Whips Leader of the Liberal Party of Australia—Senator the Hon. Robert Murray Hill Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party of Australia—Senator the Hon. Nicholas Hugh Minchin Leader of The Nationals—Senator the Hon. Ronald Leslie Doyle Boswell Deputy Leader of The Nationals—Senator the Hon. John Alexander Lindsay (Sandy) Macdonald Leader of the Australian Labor Party—Senator Christopher Vaughan Evans Deputy Leader of the Australian Labor Party—Senator Stephen Michael Conroy Leader of the Australian Democrats—Senator Lynette Fay Allison Leader of the Family First Party—Senator Steve Fielding Liberal Party of Australia Whips—Senators Jeannie Margaret Ferris and Alan Eggleston Nationals Whip—Senator Julian John James McGauran Opposition Whips—Senators George Campbell, Linda Jean Kirk and Ruth Stephanie Webber Australian Democrats Whip—Senator Andrew John Julian Bartlett

Printed by authority of the Senate

Members of the Senate State or Terri- Senator tory Term expires Party Abetz, Hon. Eric TAS 30.6.2011 LP Adams, Judith WA 30.6.2011 LP Allison, Lynette Fay VIC 30.6.2008 AD Barnett, Guy TAS 30.6.2011 LP Bartlett, Andrew John Julian QLD 30.6.2008 AD Bishop, Thomas Mark WA 30.6.2008 ALP Boswell, Hon. Ronald Leslie Doyle QLD 30.6.2008 NATS Brandis, George Henry QLD 30.6.2011 LP Brown, Carol Louise(4) TAS 30.6.2008 ALP Brown, Robert James TAS 30.6.2008 AG Calvert, Hon. Paul Henry TAS 30.6.2008 LP Campbell, George NSW 30.6.2008 ALP Campbell, Hon. Ian Gordon WA 30.6.2011 LP Carr, Kim John VIC 30.6.2011 ALP Chapman, Hedley Grant Pearson SA 30.6.2008 LP Colbeck, Hon. Richard Mansell TAS 30.6.2008 LP Conroy, Stephen Michael VIC 30.6.2011 ALP Coonan, Hon. Helen Lloyd NSW 30.6.2008 LP Crossin, Patricia Margaret (3) NT ALP Eggleston, Alan WA 30.6.2008 LP Ellison, Hon. Christopher Martin WA 30.6.2011 LP Evans, Christopher Vaughan WA 30.6.2011 ALP Faulkner, Hon. John Philip NSW 30.6.2011 ALP Ferguson, Alan Baird SA 30.6.2011 LP Ferris, Jeannie Margaret SA 30.6.2008 LP Fielding, Steve VIC 30.6.2011 FF Fierravanti-Wells, Concetta Anna NSW 30.6.2011 LP Fifield, Mitchell Peter(2) VIC 30.6.2008 LP Forshaw, Michael George NSW 30.6.2011 ALP Heffernan, Hon. William Daniel NSW 30.6.2011 LP Hill, Hon. Robert Murray SA 30.6.2008 LP Hogg, John Joseph QLD 30.6.2008 ALP Humphries, Gary John Joseph (3) ACT LP Hurley, Annette SA 30.6.2011 ALP Hutchins, Stephen Patrick NSW 30.6.2011 ALP Johnston, David Albert Lloyd WA 30.6.2008 LP Joyce, Barnaby QLD 30.6.2011 NATS Kemp, Hon. Charles Roderick VIC 30.6.2008 LP Kirk, Linda Jean SA 30.6.2008 ALP Lightfoot, Philip Ross WA 30.6.2008 LP Ludwig, Joseph William QLD 30.6.2011 ALP Lundy, Kate Alexandra (3) ACT ALP Macdonald, Hon. Ian Douglas QLD 30.6.2008 LP Macdonald, John Alexander Lindsay (Sandy) NSW 30.6.2008 NATS McEwen, Anne SA 30.6.2011 ALP McGauran, Julian John James VIC 30.6.2011 NATS McLucas, Jan Elizabeth QLD 30.6.2011 ALP Marshall, Gavin Mark VIC 30.6.2008 ALP ii

State or Terri- Senator tory Term expires Party Mason, Brett John QLD 30.6.2011 LP Milne, Christine TAS 30.6.2011 AG Minchin, Hon. Nicholas Hugh SA 30.6.2011 LP Moore, Claire Mary QLD 30.6.2008 ALP Murray, Andrew James Marshall WA 30.6.2008 AD Nash, Fiona NSW 30.6.2011 NATS Nettle, Kerry Michelle NSW 30.6.2008 AG O’Brien, Kerry Williams Kelso TAS 30.6.2011 ALP Parry, Stephen TAS 30.6.2011 LP Patterson, Hon. Kay Christine Lesley VIC 30.6.2008 LP Payne, Marise Ann NSW 30.6.2008 LP Polley, Helen TAS 30.6.2011 ALP Ray, Hon. Robert Francis VIC 30.6.2008 ALP Ronaldson, Hon. Michael VIC 30.6.2011 LP Santoro, Santo (1) QLD 30.6.2008 LP Scullion, Nigel Gregory (3) NT CLP Sherry, Hon. Nicholas John TAS 30.6.2008 ALP Siewert, Rachel WA 30.6.2011 AG Stephens, Ursula Mary NSW 30.6.2008 ALP Sterle, Glenn WA 30.6.2011 ALP Stott Despoja, Natasha Jessica SA 30.6.2008 AD Troeth, Hon. Judith Mary VIC 30.6.2011 LP Trood, Russell QLD 30.6.2011 LP Vanstone, Hon. Amanda Eloise SA 30.6.2011 LP Watson, John Odin Wentworth TAS 30.6.2008 LP Webber, Ruth Stephanie WA 30.6.2008 ALP Wong, Penelope Ying Yen SA 30.6.2008 ALP Wortley, Dana SA 30.6.2011 ALP (1) Chosen by the Parliament of Queensland to fill a casual vacancy vice Hon. John Joseph Herron, resigned. (2) Chosen by the Parliament of Victoria to fill a casual vacancy vice Hon. Richard Kenneth Robert Alston, resigned. (3) Term expires at close of day next preceding the polling day for the general election of members of the House of Representatives. (4) Chosen by the Parliament of Tasmania to fill a casual vacancy vice Susan Mary Mackay, resigned.

PARTY ABBREVIATIONS AD—Australian Democrats; AG—Australian Greens; ALP—Australian Labor Party; CLP—Country Labor Party; FF—Family First Party; LP—Liberal Party of Australia; NATS—The Nationals Heads of Parliamentary Departments Clerk of the Senate—H Evans Clerk of the House of Representatives—I C Harris Secretary, Department of Parliamentary Services—H R Penfold QC

iii

HOWARD MINISTRY

Prime Minister The Hon. John Winston Howard MP Minister for Trade and Deputy Prime Minister The Hon. Mark Anthony James Vaile MP Treasurer The Hon. Peter Howard Costello MP Minister for Transport and Regional Services The Hon. Warren Errol Truss MP Minister for Defence and Leader of the Senator the Hon. Robert Murray Hill Government in the Senate Minister for Foreign Affairs The Hon. Alexander John Gosse Downer MP Minister for Health and Ageing and Leader of the The Hon. Anthony John Abbott MP House Attorney-General The Hon. Philip Maxwell Ruddock MP Minister for Finance and Administration, Deputy Senator the Hon. Nicholas Hugh Minchin Leader of the Government in the Senate and Vice-President of the Executive Council Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry The Hon. Peter John McGauran MP and Deputy Leader of the House Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Senator the Hon. Amanda Eloise Vanstone Indigenous Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Indigenous Affairs Minister for Education, Science and Training The Hon. Dr Brendan John Nelson MP Minister for Family and Community Services and Senator the Hon. Kay Christine Lesley Patterson Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Women’s Issues Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources The Hon. Ian Elgin Macfarlane MP Minister for Employment and Workplace The Hon. Kevin James Andrews MP Relations and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service Minister for Communications, Information Senator the Hon. Helen Lloyd Coonan Technology and the Arts Minister for the Environment and Heritage Senator the Hon. Ian Gordon Campbell

(The above ministers constitute the cabinet)

HOWARD MINISTRY—continued Minister for Justice and Customs and Manager of Senator the Hon. Christopher Martin Ellison Government Business in the Senate Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation Senator the Hon. Ian Douglas Macdonald Minister for the Arts and Sport Senator the Hon. Charles Roderick Kemp Minister for Human Services The Hon. Joseph Benedict Hockey MP Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs The Hon. John Kenneth Cobb MP Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer The Hon. Malcolm Thomas Brough MP Special Minister of State Senator the Hon. Eric Abetz Minister for Vocational and Technical Education The Hon. Gary Douglas Hardgrave MP and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister Minister for Ageing The Hon. Julie Isabel Bishop MP Minister for Small Business and Tourism The Hon. Frances Esther Bailey MP Minister for Local Government, Territories and The Hon. James Eric Lloyd MP Roads Minister for Veterans’ Affairs and Minister The Hon. De-Anne Margaret Kelly MP Assisting the Minister for Defence Minister for Workforce Participation The Hon. Peter Craig Dutton MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for The Hon. Dr Sharman Nancy Stone MP Finance and Administration Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for The Hon. Warren George Entsch MP Industry, Tourism and Resources Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health The Hon. Christopher Maurice Pyne MP and Ageing Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for The Hon. Teresa Gambaro MP Defence Parliamentary Secretary (Trade) Senator the Hon. John Alexander Lindsay (Sandy) Macdonald Parliamentary Secretary (Foreign Affairs) and The Hon. Bruce Fredrick Billson MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister The Hon. Gary Roy Nairn MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer The Hon. Christopher John Pearce MP Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the The Hon. Gregory Andrew Hunt MP Environment and Heritage Parliamentary Secretary (Children and Youth The Hon. Sussan Penelope Ley MP Affairs) Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for The Hon. Patrick Francis Farmer MP Education, Science and Training Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Senator the Hon. Richard Mansell Colbeck Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

SHADOW MINISTRY

Leader of the Opposition The Hon. Kim Christian Beazley MP Deputy Leader of the Opposition and Shadow Jennifer Louise Macklin MP Minister for Education, Training, Science and Research Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, Shadow Senator Christopher Vaughan Evans Minister for Indigenous Affairs and Shadow Minister for Family and Community Services Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and Senator Stephen Michael Conroy Shadow Minister for Communications and Information Technology Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Julia Eileen Gillard MP Opposition Business in the House Shadow Treasurer Wayne Maxwell Swan MP Shadow Attorney-General Nicola Louise Roxon MP Shadow Minister for Industry, Infrastructure and Stephen Francis Smith MP Industrial Relations Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade Kevin Michael Rudd MP and Shadow Minister for International Security Shadow Minister for Defence Robert Bruce McClelland MP Shadow Minister for Regional Development The Hon. Simon Findlay Crean MP Shadow Minister for Primary Industries, Martin John Ferguson MP Resources, Forestry and Tourism Shadow Minister for Environment and Heritage, Anthony Norman Albanese MP Shadow Minister for Water and Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House Shadow Minister for Housing, Shadow Minister Senator Kim John Carr for Urban Development and Shadow Minister for Local Government and Territories Shadow Minister for Public Accountability and Kelvin John Thomson MP Shadow Minister for Human Services Shadow Minister for Finance Lindsay James Tanner MP Shadow Minister for Superannuation and Senator the Hon. Nicholas John Sherry Intergenerational Finance and Shadow Minister for Banking and Financial Services Shadow Minister for Child Care, Shadow Minister Tanya Joan Plibersek MP for Youth and Shadow Minister for Women Shadow Minister for Employment and Workforce Senator Penelope Ying Yen Wong Participation and Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility

(The above are shadow cabinet ministers)

SHADOW MINISTRY—continued Shadow Minister for Consumer Affairs and Laurie Donald Thomas Ferguson MP Shadow Minister for Population Health and Health Regulation Shadow Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries Gavan Michael O’Connor MP Shadow Assistant Treasurer, Shadow Minister for Joel Andrew Fitzgibbon MP Revenue and Shadow Minister for Small Business and Competition Shadow Minister for Transport Senator Kerry Williams Kelso O’Brien Shadow Minister for Sport and Recreation Senator Kate Alexandra Lundy Shadow Minister for Homeland Security and The Hon. Archibald Ronald Bevis MP Shadow Minister for Aviation and Transport Security Shadow Minister for Veterans’ Affairs and Alan Peter Griffin MP Shadow Special Minister of State Shadow Minister for Defence Industry, Senator Thomas Mark Bishop Procurement and Personnel Shadow Minister for Immigration Anthony Stephen Burke MP Shadow Minister for Aged Care, Disabilities and Senator Jan Elizabeth McLucas Carers Shadow Minister for Justice and Customs and Senator Joseph William Ludwig Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate Shadow Minister for Overseas Aid and Pacific Robert Charles Grant Sercombe MP Island Affairs Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Peter Robert Garrett MP Reconciliation and the Arts Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of John Paul Murphy MP the Opposition Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence and The Hon. Graham John Edwards MP Veterans’ Affairs Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education Kirsten Fiona Livermore MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Environment Jennie George MP and Heritage Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Industry, Bernard Fernando Ripoll MP Infrastructure and Industrial Relations Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Immigration Ann Kathleen Corcoran MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Treasury Catherine Fiona King MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Science and Senator Ursula Mary Stephens Water Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern The Hon. Warren Edward Snowdon MP Australia and Indigenous Affairs

vii CONTENTS

WEDNESDAY, 30 NOVEMBER

Chamber Personal Explanation ...... 1 Business— Rearrangement...... 5 Statute Law Revision Bill (No. 2) 2005 and Defence (Road Transport Legislation Exemption) Bill 2005— First Reading ...... 5 Second Reading...... 6 Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Bill 2005— Second Reading...... 8 Matters of Public Interest— Australian Broadcasting Corporation ...... 51 Workplace Relations...... 54 Gynaecological Cancer...... 57 Communications...... 60 Domestic Violence...... 64 Fisheries Management...... 66 Questions Without Notice— Workplace Relations...... 68 Workplace Relations...... 69 Distinguished Visitors...... 70 Questions Without Notice— Welfare to Work...... 70 Future Fund ...... 72 Workplace Relations...... 73 Rural and Regional Health Services...... 76 Distinguished Visitors...... 77 Questions Without Notice— Australian Research Council ...... 77 Fishing Industry...... 78 Mr Robert Gerard...... 79 East Timor ...... 80 Nursing Home Safety Standards...... 81 Questions Without Notice: Additional Answers— Genetically Modified Food...... 83 Questions Without Notice: Take Note of Answers— Mr Robert Gerard...... 85 Personal Explanations...... 92 Petitions— Workplace Relations...... 93 Same-Sex Relationships ...... 94 Workplace Relations...... 94 Notices— Presentation ...... 94 Committees— Selection of Bills Committee—Report...... 95 Mr Nguyen Tuong Van ...... 96 Japanese Whaling Program...... 96

CONTENTS—continued

Same-Sex Marriage ...... 97 Sporting Achievements ...... 98 Matters of Public Importance— Kyoto Protocol ...... 98 Committees— ASIO, ASIS and DSD Committee—Report ...... 113 Scrutiny of Bills Committee—Report ...... 120 Auditor-General’s Reports— Report No. 18 of 2005-06...... 120 Documents— Responses to Senate Resolutions...... 125 Anti-Terrorism Bill (No. 2) 2005— First Reading ...... 126 Second Reading...... 126 Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Bill 2005— Second Reading...... 128 Documents— Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission ...... 143 Administrative Appeals Tribunal...... 144 Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Agency ...... 146 Consideration...... 150 Adjournment— Mr Hugh Dunn ...... 150 John Patrick Ducker ...... 153 Mr Robert Jovicic...... 155 Young Workers Legal Service ...... 157 Working Women’s Centre of South Australia...... 157 Documents— Tabling...... 160 Tabling...... 160 Questions on Notice Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry: Staff—(Question No. 656)...... 162 Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry: Staff—(Question No. 665)...... 171 Australian Federal Police: Manager International Network—(Question No. 1059) ...... 172 Mr Dragan Vasiljkovic—(Question No. 1228)...... 173

Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 1

Wednesday, 30 November 2005 Senator CHRIS EVANS—I note that you ————— are not apologising for your behaviour and The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. that you are only withdrawing the remark. Paul Calvert) took the chair at 9.30 am and My point, Mr President, is this: Senator read prayers. Campbell’s behaviour last night was totally unacceptable. He defied the chair and PERSONAL EXPLANATION stormed out of the chamber while the chair Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western was trying to bring him to order. I understand Australia—Minister for the Environment and the government whip tried to bring him back, Heritage) (9.31 am)—I seek leave to with- unsuccessfully, but the behaviour was well draw a remark I made last night. out of order. I think the senator ought to Leave granted. apologise as well as withdraw the remark. Senator IAN CAMPBELL—Last night I But I want to raise with you, Mr President, made an unparliamentary reference to Sena- the way he treated the chair. Labor senators tor Kate Lundy, which I now withdraw unre- take their role in chairing the chamber— servedly. normally not during the adjournment; I do not know what happened last night but Sena- Senator CHRIS EVANS (Western Aus- tor Moore was in the chair. We expect them tralia—Leader of the Opposition in the Sen- to be treated with respect. We expect their ate) (9.31 am)—I seek leave to make a very authority to be upheld. We do not want to see short statement. the sort of arrogance and contempt for the Leave granted. chair that was shown last night. It is certainly Senator CHRIS EVANS—I understand not fair on the acting chairs. As I say, while there was a very unfortunate incident last robust behaviour is one thing, petulant and night. I accept that Senator Ian Campbell has arrogant behaviour is another. I do not know apologised for that but I want to raise a cou- why it occurred last night. ple of issues relating to it. Labor is particu- Senator Ian Campbell—You don’t know larly concerned that Senator Campbell was what occurred. abusive to other senators following an inci- Senator CHRIS EVANS—I have had re- dent about using his mobile phone, I under- ports from the people who were in the cham- stand, in the chamber. We take the normal ber at the time, Senator Campbell. rough and tumble without overreacting generally but I do think that his behaviour last Senator Ian Campbell—Oh, yes, Labor night was well beyond the pale. I am particu- Party people. larly concerned that Senator Campbell defied Senator CHRIS EVANS—Senator the chair and stormed out of the chamber, as Campbell, if you want to make a further I understand it. statement, you do so. We will give you the Senator Ian Campbell—I did not apolo- chance to explain. gise. I withdrew the remark. The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator Ev- Senator CHRIS EVANS—That is worse, ans, you were given leave to make your point I suppose, if you are not apologising. and I believe you have made that point. Senator Ian Campbell—I withdrew the Senator CHRIS EVANS—If I am not in- remark. You should listen, mate. terjected upon, I will finish, Mr President, if you could afford me the protection from being interjected upon.

CHAMBER 2 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Senator Ian Campbell—Pot calling the the chamber by senators or other people and kettle black. You interject during question if mobiles are brought into the chamber they time. should be on a silent setting. Any use of mo- Senator CHRIS EVANS—Senator bile phones in this place is disorderly. I think Campbell, I will give you leave to explain that that is where we shall leave it. your behaviour last night without a problem. Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western I would appreciate it, and the Senate would Australia—Minister for the Environment and appreciate it, if you apologised for your petu- Heritage) (9.35 pm)—I seek leave to respond lant behaviour. But if you are not prepared to to the remarks made by the Leader of the do that then I want to raise with the President Opposition in the Senate, Senator Evans. that we think the behaviour is unacceptable. I Leave granted. am particularly concerned that the Labor Senator IAN CAMPBELL—I do not member in the chair was not afforded the want to delay the Senate but Senator Evans respect that she should have been and that wants to turn this matter into an issue. He the Senate was not afforded the respect it wants to make a political game out of this. should have been. Given the state of the What occurred last night in the chamber— numbers in the Senate, we sense that that is and he did not know what occurred; he has going to be an increasing problem with us. heard reports from his colleagues—was that We had the incident with Senator McGauran we had a very robust debate about a piece of and now we have had the incident with Sena- industrial relations legislation. There was a tor Ian Campbell. I do think that there is a Labor senator in the chair. It is a debate that wider issue here. I do not know whether you has dominated Australian politics— have looked at the video of the incident or whether you intend taking any further action, Senator Chris Evans—It was on the ad- but I do not think simply withdrawing the journment. remark some 12 hours after the performance Senator IAN CAMPBELL—Senator yesterday is good enough and I do not think Evans, by way of interjection, shows how it does anything to protect the standards that little he knows about what occurred last we expect in the Senate. night. My mobile phone was turned to silent The PRESIDENT—I hear what you say. in deference to the Black Rod’s advice, I did receive a report on what happened last which I think was very good advice. I did night. Senator Ian Campbell has withdrawn receive a call and tried to very discreetly, the remark. As I said yesterday at the begin- with my head below the desk, deal with the ning of question time, I receive emails and call as quickly as I could. I was called to or- phone calls about the behaviour of senators der by the acting deputy president and im- in this place on a regular basis, particularly mediately ceased the phone call after a point in recent times, and they are about senators of order by WA Labor senator Ruth Webber. from both sides of the chamber. I believe that I said across the chamber, no doubt disor- we should all take a good look at ourselves derly, that I was trying to deal with a matter. and the way we behave in this place. I take I then got a tirade of abuse from both Senator the opportunity now to remind all honour- Webber and Senator Lundy. able senators that the Usher of the Black Rod Just prior to the phone going off on silent, did issue a circular, with my authority, we had been having a very robust debate which, amongst other things, reiterated the about the industrial relations changes that the rule that mobile phones are not to be used in Howard government has brought to the par-

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 3 liament. It is a very important debate. For the trial relations changes would help break Labor Party it is a debate that goes to the down the family unit, destroy picnics and very existence of the labour movement and barbecues and be an end to Australia as we their organisation. For us it is a debate that know it, and how important the family unit goes to the future of the security and strength and children were. of the Australian economy, job security and The PRESIDENT—Minister, I think we jobs growth in Australia. The Liberal Party are getting to the stage where the brief and the National Party—the coalition par- statement is becoming a debate. I think we ties—and the Labor Party have a fundamen- all accept your explanation. tal disagreement over this. It is a very strong Senator IAN CAMPBELL—I did not debate. ask for a debate; I just asked leave to make a If you go back to the Hansard, Mr Presi- statement to respond. dent, you will see that only moments before The PRESIDENT—I accept that. the incident Senator Lundy had accused coalition senators of having blood on their hands Senator IAN CAMPBELL—I will now because of the potential deaths of building conclude by saying that I made a reference to workers because of our legislative changes. Senator Lundy, who had only just sat down She actually said that we would have blood having made a speech about family values. I on our hands if we voted for this legislation. was trying to discreetly deal with an issue I took a point of order on that and the Labor and, obviously, took exception to Senator senators got very upset that I dared take a Lundy’s and Senator Webber’s very loud, point of order. Acting Deputy President rude and abusive interjections. Moore, Mr President, overruled my point of Senator Chris Evans—You ran out of the order until she then took advice from the chamber. Deputy Clerk. Senator IAN CAMPBELL—I actually Senator Lundy then made another remark walked out of the chamber because I was where she called the Prime Minister of Aus- asked to take the call out of the chamber, tralia a dictator. Once again I had to take an- which I did. I wanted to urgently deal with other point of order. The initial ruling of the the issue— Acting Deputy President was to the effect Senator Chris Evans—While the Acting that this had been a strong debate. I do not Deputy President was speaking. think she used the words ‘robust debate’; it is The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator Ev- a term I use too often and I do not accuse her ans, interjections do not help. of using it. She said lots of similar remarks had been made during this debate and there- Senator IAN CAMPBELL—Senator fore it was effectively okay. Evans wants to make a little political game out of it. He gets up here with his voice Senator Ludwig—That was earlier. quivering because he does not know whether Senator IAN CAMPBELL—Of course it he is on sure ground. was earlier; it was a few minutes earlier. I The PRESIDENT—Senator Ian Camp- did the right thing; I made a mistake. I did bell, I think that short statement has got to something that was unparliamentary by call- the stage where it has finished. ing Senator Lundy an inappropriate name. She had just made a speech about family Senator Chris Evans—Be a man and values, how the Howard government’s indus- apologise.

CHAMBER 4 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Senator IAN CAMPBELL—Why don’t The PRESIDENT—I did have a cursory you speak louder. look at Hansard this morning. I respect the The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator Ev- work that all the acting deputy presidents ans and Senator Ian Campbell, I think it is do—sometimes in difficult circumstances. time this discussion ceased. Senator Moore did call me and report to me that an unparliamentary remark had been Senator IAN CAMPBELL—Mr Presi- made. I received a copy of the Hansard from dent, I have done the right thing— the Clerk, which I reviewed. Senator Ian The PRESIDENT—Order! I think we Campbell has withdrawn that remark. If have heard enough of this debate. Senator there is any other action I need to take, I will Ian Campbell has withdrawn the statement; review the Hansard again. I do not want this Senator Evans has made his point. Senator thing to grow into a huge problem. There are, Ian Campbell has explained the reasons why from time to time, senators on both sides of he made that remark. I do not think any good the place who act inappropriately. We have can be served by continuing this debate this to try to be even handed. I am sure that my morning when we have other more important acting deputy presidents all try to be even things to do. Clerk, can we call on the busi- handed. ness? Senator Forshaw—Mr President, I raise Senator Bob Brown—Mr President, I a point of order. I would like you to clarify a raise a point of order. To have some good matter regarding the withdrawal of interjec- come out of this, might I suggest that you tions. Yesterday during question time Senator look at the clarification of the rule on mobile Ian Campbell was requested to withdraw an phones that they may not be used in the unparliamentary remark and in doing so he chamber, on silent or otherwise? repeated the unparliamentary remark. I un- The PRESIDENT—The Black Rod has derstand that that is not an appropriate or an already sent a circular around on the situa- unreserved withdrawal. I would ask you to tion with mobile phones. It may be that, as I have a look at what transpired and to clarify believe was the case last night, Senator Ian that. Is it appropriate for a senator to use an Campbell received a very urgent personal unparliamentary term against another senator phone call. He admitted that he should have and then when withdrawing it get up and left the chamber but it may be that senators repeat it? If that is going to be the future may need their phones when they have an situation then so be it. urgent family crisis or something similar. As The PRESIDENT—I hear what you are long as it is on silent and it is not used in the saying. chamber, I cannot see any problem. The Senator Murray—On a point of order, Black Rod has already issued, with my au- can I briefly advise you that I witnessed that thority, a statement regarding mobile phones. incident and if you wish me to provide you That is that. with a report either official or informal I will Senator Chris Evans—Mr President, I be glad to do so. raise a point of order. I want to be clear that The PRESIDENT—Thank you. you understand that I am requesting you to examine the treatment of Senator Moore Senator Lundy—On a point of order, Mr when she was in the chair. That is the most President. I respect your request that we important issue arising out of this. move on to other business, but I do feel compelled to also take the opportunity that

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 5

Senator Murray has offered, because I be- that I was accused of being a hypocrite by lieve there were inaccuracies in the way Senator Ian Campbell. Then, in withdrawing Senator Ian Campbell described the events. it, he said, ‘I withdraw the fact that I’ve Senator Faulkner—Mr President, my called Senator Faulkner a hypocrite,’ so he point of order, and it is actually a point of got two bites at the cherry. It is pretty sleazy. order, goes to the matter effectively raised by It is pretty low. I think that you ought to Senator Forshaw. At the conclusion of ques- think about that, Mr President, as you reflect tion time yesterday, Mr President, you made on these issues. a statement and I sought leave and responded The PRESIDENT—I have taken notice to the statement. At that point I was accused of what has been said this morning and I will of being a hypocrite, which was withdrawn, think upon those issues. and grandly, by Senator Ian Campbell at the BUSINESS time. I assume I was accused of being a Rearrangement hypocrite because I have often suggested that we ought to have some consistency about Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— when statements are made from the chair. I Manager of Government Business in the have often made the point that perhaps it is Senate) (9.47 am)—I move: more appropriate after taking note than after That government business notice of motion no. question time. 1 standing in the names of the Minister for the Arts and Sport (Senator Kemp) and Senator I want to make the point, and I am sure Lundy for today, relating to Commonwealth sup- you would appreciate it, Mr President, that port for football, be postponed till a later hour. when a statement is made by the chair, really Question agreed to. the only opportunity a senator has to address the issue is directly after the statement has STATUTE LAW REVISION BILL (No. 2) been made, whether by leave to make a 2005 statement or by leave to move a motion that DEFENCE (ROAD TRANSPORT the Senate take note of the statement. I do LEGISLATION EXEMPTION) BILL not think there is any alternative for a sena- 2005 tor, and I am sure that you would accept that First Reading that is the case. Perhaps there is an issue in Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— relation to consistency about when such Minister for Justice and Customs) (9.47 statements are made. I just think that we am)—I move: ought to try and ensure that you adopt a procedure whereby they are made at a time con- That the following bills be introduced: sistent with the order of business, if that is A Bill for an Act to make various amendments of possible. It may be a matter of such signifi- the statute law of the Commonwealth, to repeal cance that it is not possible. certain obsolete Acts, and for related purposes; and It was in that context that after you made a A Bill for an Act to provide for members of the statement I sought leave, which was quite Australian Defence Force and others to be exempt proper, to briefly respond to your statement from State and Territory road transport laws in and thank you for giving me notice of the certain circumstances, and for related purposes. statement that you made from the chair. I Question agreed to. was able to do that. I commenced my statement by thanking you. It was at that point

CHAMBER 6 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— The bill proposes to correct technical errors such Minister for Justice and Customs) (9.48 as misspellings, punctuation errors, numbering am)—I move: errors and misdescriptions of text that have occurred in Commonwealth Acts as a result of draft- That these bills may proceed without formali- ing and clerical mistakes. The bill also proposes ties, may be taken together and be now read a to repeal a number of obsolete Acts that have no first time. current or future operation. Question agreed to. The bill has three schedules. Schedule 1 amends Bills read a first time. errors contained in 14 principal Acts. The kinds of Second Reading errors proposed for amendment in Schedule 1 are of a minor and technical nature, such as incorrect Senator ELLISON (Western Australia— spelling, punctuation or numbering. Schedule 2 Minister for Justice and Customs) (9.48 amends errors contained in 19 amending Acts. am)—I table the explanatory memoranda Many of these errors are misdescribed amend- relating to the bills and move: ments that either incorrectly describe the text to That these bills be now read a second time. be amended or specify the wrong location for the insertion of new text. None of the proposed I seek leave to have the second reading amendments will make any substantive changes speeches incorporated in Hansard. to the law. Leave granted. Schedule 3 repeals a total of 27 obsolete Acts. The speeches read as follows— Part 1 proposes to repeal one Act which is administered by the Minister for Defence. Part 2 pro- STATUTE LAW REVISION BILL (NO. 2) 2005 poses to repeal 19 Acts which are administered by The Statute Law Revision Bill (No 2) 2005 con- the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, and tinues the important exercise of correcting mis- Part 3 proposes to repeal 10 Acts which are ad- takes and removing expired laws from the statute ministered by the Minister for Industry, Tourism book. The corrections and repeals are desirable in and Resources. order to improve the quality and accuracy of There are various commencement dates for the Commonwealth legislation and to facilitate the provisions listed in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 publication of consolidated versions of Acts. because the commencement of each item is tied to This Parliament is very well served by the Office the commencement of the provision that created of Parliamentary Counsel, which provides the the error. The effect of the commencement provi- Parliament with Bills that are drafted to a very sions is that the errors are taken to have been cor- high standard. The drafters in the Office demon- rected immediately after the error was made. All strate their professionalism and expertise in the other provisions commence on Royal Assent. quality of the drafting that comes before us. The While none of the amendments proposed by the Office’s commitment to the quality of the Com- Schedules will alter the content of the law, the bill monwealth statute book is also evident in the fact will improve the quality and public accessibility that this bill is one that has been initiated by the of Commonwealth legislation. Office of Parliamentary Counsel. ————— I commend the Office of Parliamentary Counsel for its work in preparing the bill, for being atten- DEFENCE (ROAD TRANSPORT tive to the operation of laws on the statute book LEGISLATION EXEMPTION) BILL 2005 and drafting amendments to correct any identified This bill clarifies the extent of Defence’s exemp- errors. In this way, Statute Law Revision Bills tion from the operation of particular State and prepared by the Office of Parliamentary Counsel Territory road transport laws in certain circum- play a key role in ensuring the statute book is stances. It will enable the effective operation of accurate, accessible and effective. the Defence Road Transport Exemption Frame- work, recently negotiated between Defence and

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 7

State and Territory road transport authorities. The However, these exemptions were never imple- agreed Exemption Framework details the exemp- mented because the regime prescribed was de- tions and processes that will be applied uniformly pendent on the adoption by the States and Territo- across the States and Territories to support the ries of model road transport legislation, which did conduct of Australian Defence Force road trans- not occur. Following the Review of the National port operations. The Australian Transport Council Road Transport Commission Act the Department endorsed the Exemption Framework on 18 No- of Transport and Regional Services recommended vember 2005. that the Defence provisions should not be carried This bill and the Exemption Framework it under- forward to the replacement legislation. The re- pins, reinforces the need for the Australian De- placement legislation, the National Transport fence Force to operate its land vehicle fleet with- Commission Act, was passed by parliament in out restrictions imposed by Commonwealth, State 2003. and Territory road transport laws. Exemptions An intergovernmental agreement established to from these laws enable the Australian Defence oversight the introduction of the National Trans- Force to move its capabilities effectively and effi- port Commission Act provided a mechanism for ciently along the Australian road transport net- Defence and the State and Territory governments work. Agreement to a national exemption frame- to move forward in developing an appropriate work further provides the Australian Defence exemption framework. Consequently, the parties, Force with a consistent process in dealing with with the assistance of the National Transport the requirements of individual State and Territory Commission, have worked assiduously over the jurisdictions. past two years to deliver a workable exemption Australian Defence Force members currently framework. This result provides an excellent ex- enjoy a wide immunity from State and Territory ample of cooperation between the Common- licensing laws in relation to such matters as road wealth and the States and Territories in support of transport under subsection 123(1) of the Defence the defence effort. Act 1903. This bill will better reflect the co- The Exemption Framework establishes the spe- operative approach which underpins the Exemp- cific categories of exemptions that will apply for tion Framework. It will limit the Defence exemp- principal ADF routes used in exercises, operation from State and Territory legislation under tions and day-to-day activities. The exemptions section 123 of the Defence Act in this area and, in involve specific engineering dimensions relating effect, replace it with the agreed Exemption to the mass, size and width of Australian Defence Framework. The bill provides an opportunity to Force land assets, as well as specific licensing address any uncertainty regarding possible gaps and road rules exemptions for Australian Defence in the scope of section 123, as well as providing a Force personnel. These exemptions will also ap- clear statement of the Defence intent to work ply to personnel from visiting foreign Defence closely with the States and Territories in relation Forces acting in accordance with an arrangement to road transport. The new Exemption Framework approved by the ADF. will be responsive to the requirements of the Implementation of the Exemption Framework States and Territories as the owners of the road will occur over the next six to twelve months. transport infrastructure and Defence as the user. Jurisdictions are expected to implement the Ex- The introduction of this bill is consistent with a emption Framework through their respective ad- similar approach adopted in 1998 to limit the ministrative processes on a voluntary basis. De- immunity contained in the Defence Act and re- fence will concurrently amend as required its place it with a more specific exemption regime. Defence Road Transport Instructions to ensure At that time an amendment was made to the Na- internal compliance with the Exemption Frame- tional Road Transport Commission Act 1991, work. providing the Australian Defence Force with a Defence will be required to resolve outstanding broad exemption for special defence-related cir- issues with individual jurisdictions during this cumstances. period before full implementation can be

CHAMBER 8 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 achieved. These matters will continue to be pur- forums and in the Australian and international sued in a consultative and cooperative manner. literature. We do not always agree. The Exemption Framework will be maintained by However, we share grave concerns about the the National Transport Commission and will be historic and far-reaching changes now pro- available for public viewing on the National posed for Australia’s workplace relations and Transport Commission’s website. their potential effects upon Australian work- Finally, it should be said that this bill does not places, workers, and our larger society and impose any requirements on State and Territory economy. governments. It simply limits the current Defence They then proceeded to list 10 very real con- immunity under subsection 123(1) of the Defence cerns that flow from this legalisation. One of Act to ensure that the road transport exemptions set out in the Exemption Framework can operate their number was Ms Robyn May, a research in the manner that they are intended to. fellow from the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, who appeared before the com- This bill reflects Defence’s willingness to work with the States and Territories on these matters, mittee on 17 November with three of her rather than utilising Commonwealth powers to colleagues. During their time in front of the impose an exemption solution on individual juris- committee, Ms May described the experi- dictions. ence of New Zealand workers when the gov- Ordered that further consideration of the ernment implemented industrial relations bills be adjourned to the first day of the next changes. She said: period of sittings, in accordance with stand- ... collective bargaining levels collapsed in favour ing order 111. of individual bargaining. However, bargaining was not really what was happening. Instead, often Ordered that the bills be listed on the No- workers were offered standardised individual tice Paper as separate orders of the day. contracts that unilaterally removed conditions. WORKPLACE RELATIONS These were presented on a ‘take it or leave it’ AMENDMENT (WORK CHOICES) basis. BILL 2005 She continued: Second Reading The 1990s in New Zealand saw increased ine- Debate resumed from 29 November, on quality in income distribution, a significant fall in motion by Senator Abetz: the full-time work participation rate for men, flat productivity, a minimum wage that did not keep That this bill be now read a second time. pace with inflation and real wage cuts for many Senator STEPHENS (New South Wales) vulnerable workers. In some sectors, such as re- (9.50 am)—I was reflecting last night on the tail, penalty and overtime payments were unilat- conduct of the inquiry into this Workplace erally removed by employers without compensa- Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Bill tion. A significant wages gap between Australia and New Zealand opened up, estimated to be 2005. Perhaps a good place to start is with somewhere around 20 per cent, even accounting submission 175, entitled Research evidence for the fact that over 400,000 New Zealanders about the effects of the ‘work choices’ bill, live in Australia and not just for the good weather. written by a group of 151 Australian indus- This evidence continued for another 12 trial relations, labour market and legal aca- pages of Hansard. What was mentioned of demics. I quote from the submission: this evidence or the submission in the major- We hold divergent views on many issues. Indeed, ity report? Nothing. Other than a listing in we regularly debate industrial, economic and the appendix and within the minority report, workplace issues at national and international you would not even know that these academ-

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 9 ics had provided evidence. Their absence policies, cultures and government programs have from the government report surely fits with grown up. Senator Brandis’s comments that unless there Unless careful adjustments are made to sur- was something in it for them, why would rounding institutions, laws and policies, inevita- they ever dream of acknowledging it. In fact, bly that whole contract is challenged. The Work flicking through the footnotes of the majority Choices bill, particularly in conjunction with the report, I cannot even find a single mention of Welfare to Work changes, represents a wholesale change to the way Australian workplaces operate any of the evidence taken from the public and, as a consequence, will have major implica- hearings on 17 November. Perhaps this is tions for the Australian community more broadly. because the majority of witnesses who gave So there is this level of criticism from one of evidence that day were highly critical of the the government’s own. It was not what it legislation—in fact, on the day those critical wanted to hear, so it was ignored in the re- of this legislation outnumbered the support- port. ers almost two to one. Those opposite are pretending that the hearings simply did not The Australian Catholic Commission for occur. Employment Relations stated that the IR proposals before them did not satisfy their On 17 November, the Hansard records requirements for what should be in the legis- that groups who gave evidence included the lation. Mr Michael McDonald, the acting Australian Workers Union, who recom- chair, stated: mended that the bill be rejected in its en- tirety; the Human Rights and Equal Oppor- The pursuit of economic growth by means that tunity Commission, who had grave concerns impose unfair burdens on the poor and vulnerable, and which impose burdens on struggling about it; the Transport Workers Union, who families, should be resisted. also recommended the bill’s rejection; and the Australian Catholic Commission for Em- And he said further: ployment Relations, who said the bill did not The Australian fair pay and conditions standard satisfy their requirements. Refusing to ac- does not constitute a fair minimum standard for knowledge these contributions to the debate the purpose of workplace negotiations. A depar- is in fact another strategy of this government ture from the current safety net would expose many low-paid and industrially weak employees in silencing dissenting voices. to inequitable bargaining that will impact on their I would like to briefly look at what the terms and conditions of employment and conse- Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Com- quently their ability to support themselves and mission and the Australian Catholic Com- their families. mission for Employment Relations provided Unfortunately, these were not the only con- in evidence to the committee. HREOC ex- cerns that were blatantly ignored by govern- pressed deep concerns about the implications ment members in their report. In fact, practi- of this legislation, especially when coupled cally any evidence critical of the changes with the extreme Welfare to Work changes, suffered this fate. For example, respected on Australia’s social fabric. Pru Goward, the legal academic Dr Jill Murray from La Trobe Sex Discrimination Commissioner, said: University, who made a powerful submission HREOC does have grave concerns about the im- and appeared as a witness, did not even rate plications of dismantling or removing any signifi- a mention in the majority report. She should cant planks of a social, legal and economic con- have been included—her evidence was very tract in Australia which has evolved over 100 important. She outlined in vivid detail what a years and around which a variety of institutions, job can be reduced to under this legislation.

CHAMBER 10 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Dr Murray’s evidence highlighted the churches, welfare organisations and indi- worst features of this legislation. There will viduals, all of whom give their expertise as a be no minimum or maximum weekly hours, contribution to good public policy? They besides the 38 hours averaged over a 12- dismiss it whenever the message is not what month period. There will be no entitlement to they want to hear. And why is this govern- a suitable income week by week because the ment taking to an art form the practice of concept of a weekly wage is abolished. There individually impugning the professional will be no meaningful entitlement to over- reputation of those who dare to criticise their time payments. There will be no entitlement decision making or rash policy pronounce- to higher rates of pay for unsociable hours; ments? It is a disgrace. It is a shameful prac- the employee can be required to work at any tice by government members and one which time in the 24-hour span. There is no legal is intellectually lazy: taking the low road, entitlement under the bill’s scheme to cer- attacking the messenger, not the message. It tainty of scheduling; the scheduling is is a sign of arrogance, contempt and hubris wholly in the hands of the employer. There is that is becoming a hallmark of parliamentary no legal entitlement to a written statement of debate. Where is the economic modelling? employment status and conditions of em- Where is the economic analysis that shows ployment on engagement. There is no legal how the range of changes are going to im- entitlement to pay or hours records. There is prove productivity, create jobs, improve the no or little job security. There will be no ac- circumstances of working men and women cess to modern work and family standards and their families? Most government mem- created by the AIRC earlier this year. There bers do not even feel the need to defend is no right to receive information about these aspects of the legislation, because they changes at work or be consulted about such cannot; nor can they describe the impacts of issues. There is no access to legally man- the intersection between this legislation and dated career structures. There is no right to the Welfare to Work reforms that we will collectively bargain. Finally, as we all know, witness being bulldozed through the Senate there is no voice in the new Work Choices next week. wage setting process. Let me highlight just one submission from Who are most likely to feel those effects? an individual for those senators opposite and Those working on minimum wages, casual ask them to consider the important message workers, young workers, single parents, presented in good faith by an Australian elec- women, unskilled workers, those with poor tor. I am referring to submission No. 144. It English and rural workers, all holding it to- is from Kate Lester, a very worried mother gether as best they can. They will be screwed who believes that her concerns about the both ways: through this and the Welfare to industrial relations changes are very well Work reforms. No wonder Dr Murray’s sub- founded, given the recent experience of her mission is noticeably absent from the major- 14-year-old daughter, Isobella. Isobella was ity report. Labor picked it up in the minority recently fired from an ice-cream parlour in report and I have picked it up again now. Manly in Sydney, which had just experi- Although there were over 5,000 individual enced a change of management, because she submissions, most of those were dismissed refused to sign a new contract that would as spam by the government. have undercut both her hourly rate of pay Why does this government dismiss the and her existing entitlement to penalty rates contribution by academics, peak bodies,

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 11 for working on Sundays. In the words of Ms I refuse to sign the AWA to enable and my child is Lester, her daughter’s employer: not offered the job. This is not a choice. ... approached each young worker individually Let me assure Ms Lester and her daughter and presented a new contract. He said words to that we in Labor agree. You are right: this is the effect of, ‘You need to sign this to confirm not a choice. The very core of this legislation that you are working with me.’ He then proceeded is about stripping choice—stripping it from to flick through the documents over approxi- the employee and dumping it squarely in the mately 10 minutes and acknowledged that the lap of the employer. That is their work document contained no penalty rates and no load- choice. And Senator Brandis might note for ings. The employer did not offer to Isobella for her to take a copy home to consider. She was the record that the detail is not in the legisla- asked to sign the document there and then. tion. This government want to hide the detail in regulations that we will not even see for My daughter wouldn’t sign the document. That night she raised the matter with me and we dis- weeks, perhaps months. That is their work- cussed the contract. Isobella decided not to sign place relations amendment bill, and Labor the new contract. absolutely and unreservedly opposes it. When she went to work the following day, Senator CROSSIN (Northern Territory) the employer— (10.03 am)—I rise to provide a contribution to the debate on the Workplace Relations ... inquired as to whether Isobella had yet signed the contract. When he became aware that she Amendment (Work Choices) Bill 2005. Un- hadn’t he said ‘So, you’ve decided that you’re no doubtedly, this legislation strips away 100 longer working for us.’ years of mutual respect for workers’ rights, Fortunately for Isobella, she had the where- removes the legal protection for many em- withal to ask for help from her union, the ployment conditions and sets a new all-time SDA in New South Wales, who instigated a low for the future workplace conditions of claim of victimisation under section 213 of Australian workers. Since Federation, our the New South Wales Industrial Relations industrial relations system has been built on Act and her employer quickly offered the the notion that ordinary hardworking Austra- position back. It is worth noting that Iso- lians got a fair pay for a fair day’s work and bella’s contract still had to pass the no disad- that everyone had the chance to participate in vantage test and the union represented action the benefits of economic growth but that was an unfair dismissal claim. there was also protection there for the worker when times got tough. Both of these protections will soon be eradicated from Isobella’s workplace and it These changes were not put before the will be open slather for employers around the Australian people at the last election, so this country. The scales will be tipped over- government has no mandate to strip away whelmingly in favour of employers over em- those rights, which we have enjoyed for 100 ployees, who will have the choice between years, and to attack the long-held belief that taking a job that drastically cuts their rights everyone is entitled to a fair go. The Prime and pay or taking no job at all. Parents such Minister claims that this bill is fair. ‘Fair’ is as Ms Lester will have to sign an AWA on defined in the dictionary as ‘free from bias, behalf of their children. In her words: dishonesty or injustice’. To attempt to describe this bill as fair is therefore a travesty. I either sign the AWA to enable my child to get It is not free from bias, it is not just and to try the job working on less than Award conditions or to suggest that it is can only be described as dishonest. So, on all counts, it fails.

CHAMBER 12 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

There is an enormous gap between the government may like to try to claim credit rhetoric and the reality in the proposed for this, it is in fact all based on changes workplace relations changes before us in this commenced by past Labor governments. The chamber this week. The rhetoric says that industrial relations system has not held the these changes will help secure the future economy back. Disputes are in fact at an all- prosperity of Australians. Even Brad Noring- time low. The fact that the Howard govern- ton in the Australian on 3 November pointed ment believes we may now be facing a slow- out: down in our economic growth and prosperity But that’s where the fine rhetoric as compared is not the fault of workers or trade unions in with the actual impact of the changes goes awry this country. The changes the government is ... almost all of these rules strengthen the bargain- pushing here will do little to help solve the ing position of the employer. So much so that ... situation. Employers will not take on extra employees will be at the complete mercy of an workers just because labour is cheap or is employer’s benevolence. easily dismissed. They will only do so if Antony Forsyth wrote in the Age in October: there is work available for them to do and if ... when you drill down into the detail of Work- they can find workers with skills to do that Choices, the rhetoric of freedom, choice and bar- work at a profit. We all know that under the gaining between “equals” is revealed to be largely Howard government we have seen a massive illusory. skills shortage on the increase, and it is being The proposed changes to workplace relations ignored daily by this government. The gov- limit the ability of workers to form unions, ernment has grossly underfunded TAFE and severely restrict the rights of unions to enter VET for years, and tens of thousands of workplaces to help workers, limit the ability young Australians have missed out on uni- of workers to bargain collectively, restrict the versity and TAFE places in recent years. ability of any neutral umpire to settle dis- It is this skills shortage and the declining putes, remove any guarantees on many basic investment in our national infrastructure that existing conditions and remove the no disad- are now causing any economic slowdown, vantage test. The list goes on. For the Aussie not the workers and certainly not the trade worker this bill is horrendous. It is the unions. There is absolutely no need for the Christmas present from hell. changes proposed in this so-called Work If the Prime Minister and the Minister for Choices bill. This government has been un- Employment and Workplace Relations, Mr able to comprehensively prove that such Andrews, seriously think workers have the changes are needed or warranted at this time. ability to bargain for their conditions on an Rather, it is a 30-year-old macabre dream even playing field with employers, it is fur- from an out-of-touch Prime Minister to shat- ther evidence of just how out of touch they ter unions and workers and to see our wages are—or just how much a puppet of the busi- and conditions on a par with those of our ness industry they have become. If Minister Asian neighbours. Andrews seriously thinks that workers can Workers will not know from one contract afford to take accountants in to bargain for to the next what pay and conditions they will them, as he suggested, how little he knows or lose in the bargaining, for the no disadvan- cares about the average worker’s financial tage test will disappear. If a worker asks for situation. more than an employer is offering then the Australia is now in its 14th consecutive employer will be able to go and find an un- year of economic growth. While the Howard employed ‘Billy’ and offer him minimal pay

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 13 and conditions instead. Employees will have surprising that they do have a high unem- no protection from dismissal, whatever the ployment rate. size of the business. Employers could claim At the opposite end of the regulation operational reasons for dismissing a large scale, the USA has a very deregulated labour part of their work force and then hire more market, with some not very spectacular re- employees with greatly reduced conditions. sults, including a huge number of have-nots Not only will the neutral umpire, the AIRC, who really struggle to survive at all. Ask the be emasculated and left with a very limited Kiwis too. In mid-1990 their conservative role, but the minister will have the power to National Party government tore up the indus- say, if workers have the temerity to strike trial relations rules and shifted power, just as over negotiations, that the strike is illegal, the Howard government is now doing, to the after which draconian penalties can be ap- employers. Many Kiwis copped savage take- plied to individuals and to unions. home pay cuts. This is just a small part of what this bill Using the unemployment rate as an indi- does. It takes away everything from the cator of labour market health is unreliable, as workers and leaves all power with employers it omits a large group of potential employees, and the minister. There is indeed no evidence namely those who have dropped out of the at all that the proposed changes will have jobless statistics. A more reliable measure is any great benefit for our national employ- the proportion of working age population ment or productivity growth. For some time, who have a job. The OECD also has an index there were government claims that the of employment protection, which measures changes to the unfair dismissal laws could the strictness of employment protection leg- lead to the creation of some 70,000 or more islation. When we match up the two sets of jobs. This number came from a survey that figures—the employment protection and was discredited for poor research and wrong employment rates—for Australia and 16 assumptions. It was discredited by, for ex- comparable OECD countries, it does not of- ample, people like Dr Oslington, who gave fer much support for the government evidence to the Senate committee inquiry changes either. Australia is already in the into the unfair dismissal bill. bottom half of the employment protection The Prime Minister further claims that the range. Our workers already have less protec- only way to have employment growth is to tion than most and we are only a touch above reduce protection for employees. He uses the average on the employment scale. example of countries like Germany to claim Several other countries with higher em- that a country with a highly regulated labour ployment protection also have higher em- market has a far higher unemployment rate ployment rates. To put it more simply: of the than Australia. However, as pointed out by six countries with the highest levels of em- Peter Brown, writing in the Age on 28 Octo- ployment, five have higher employee protec- ber, what he fails to say is that in the case of tion than we do. So further attacking em- Germany the labour market is so highly ployee rights and protection looks unneces- regulated as to be totally different and irrele- sary and unlikely to help much in improving vant to our situation. Furthermore, it is not so our employment rate. Notably, the OECD long ago that Germany took on the added countries above us and with better employee burden of the economic problems and protection and employment are Switzerland, masses of unemployed from the former the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Den- communist East Germany, so it is hardly

CHAMBER 14 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 mark. By and large, these countries are all far The intention of this bill is to individualise less resource-rich than Australia, but they the industrial conditions of the workplace, so value add to products with highly skilled Work Choices will see an expansion of the work forces. They have not neglected educa- Australian workplace agreements. AWAs are tion and training and the funding of that sec- less family friendly. The facts are there. Only tor. 12 per cent of AWAs registered between This bill will significantly reshape the 1995 and 2000 had any work and family terms of employment in Australia, especially provisions and only 25 per cent of AWAs for those who have responsibility for both registered between 2002 and 2003 had fam- work and care. The government again lacks ily or carer’s leave. Eight per cent had ma- evidence that these changes will benefit ternity leave and five per cent had parental families and, as Barbara Pocock stated in her leave. This legislation will also impact upon submission to the Senate inquiry: female workers much harder than it will male workers. Women who need family- These changes are occurring as against the background of changes in the welfare system requiring friendly provisions the most will have the sole parents whose youngest child turns 8 to find least access to them. Only 51 per cent of at least 15 hours of paid work. women on AWAs had access to annual leave, These workers will enter a minimalist, individual- compared to 62 per cent of men, in AWAs istic system with significant family and care re- registered in 2002 and 2003, and 14 per cent sponsibilities and weak bargaining power. fewer women than men had access to any Australia already lags behind the industrial- general work and family provisions. ised world when it comes to recognising and This bill also prohibits the Industrial Rela- accommodating workers with family respon- tions Commission from hearing and presid- sibilities—with high levels of insecure work, ing over national test cases. This will have a long average hours of full-time work and a major impact on the working conditions of poor regime of leave to attend to family women as we know that most of the gains, if commitments. While many countries are not all of the gains, enjoyed by women and seeking to improve their work and family their families in the work force in the past arrangements, as highlighted by the Sex Dis- have come from national test case decisions, crimination Commissioner, Pru Goward, such as the paid maternity leave and unpaid Work Choices will ensure that this country parental leave provisions. goes in the opposite direction. The five com- I turn to my electorate in the Northern ponents of the fair pay and conditions stan- Territory. There are a number of comments I dard represent a retreat on national work and want to make. I have brought into the cham- family standards by incorporating only basic ber with me this morning an Australian leave conditions and failing to allow the workplace agreement from a company in the rights of parents to request extended family Northern Territory. It says: leave, part-time work or more shared paren- Normal work hours for ground staff are six days tal leave. This bill also provides that, once on per week and/or at the direction of your supervi- an individual agreement, an employee can sor. never return to an award. So, once given up, It goes on to say: basic award conditions, especially those enjoyed by families, will be lost in the long Sick leave accumulating at the rate of one day per month worked will be granted for illnesses not as term. a result of workers compensation claims.

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 15

No paid annual leave is cumulative from one year sand his head has been in in recent years, but to the next. my understanding of the trade union fig- With regard to wages, the last page says that ures—of which I have an intimate knowl- those with duties in accordance with the di- edge—is that the Northern Territory is one rections of the operations manager or a per- place in this country where trade union son delegated by him will receive $550 a membership has steadily been on the in- week gross for 5½ days. There is no mention crease for more than a decade now. That is in this AWA of penalty rates. There is no particularly so given the expansion of the mention in this AWA of any shift bonuses or railway, the Bechtel LNG gas plant and the of any parental leave, maternity leave or any- expansion of the G3 project at Alcan. Trade thing other than the conditions that this boss union numbers are on the increase, and to is demanding of this worker. This AWA was suggest for one minute that these industrial signed in July of this year under the current relations changes are needed because the agreement, so I do not imagine that things situation in the Northern Territory is that are going to get much better for this com- businesses are struggling defies the reality pany and these workers. and the facts. In fact, only on Monday of this The Palmerston City Council has adopted week, a press release entitled ‘Territory a policy of insisting that all new employees Businesses Look to Strong Future’ put out by sign an AWA as a condition of employment. the Northern Territory government claimed Under this, annual leave will be reduced that the Sensis business index released on from six weeks to four weeks, but a recent Monday reveals that Territory small busi- opinion survey that was conducted by Peter nesses are continuing to outperform the na- Berry Consultancy among staff of the Palm- tion in key areas of economic growth. After erston City Council showed that, of the four gaining a six-and-a-half-year high in busi- things that would most change Palmerston ness confidence in the last Sensis index, Ter- City Council for the better, the most frequent ritory small businesses recorded the highest response from the employees of that council level of sales, profitability and capital ex- was an enterprise bargaining agreement. Not penditure over the last quarter. There is no surprisingly, of the four worst things about evidence at all that the current workplace working for the council, one of them unani- relations system is failing businesses in the mously chosen by staff was having an indi- Northern Territory. There is no evidence at vidual contract. People in the work force do all by this government to show that these not like it. They do not like being forced into massive changes in the workplace are needed a situation where it is them against the boss. in order to make business more productive or They do not like being in a situation where more profitable. There is no evidence what- their rights to collectively bargain are taken soever—not during the inquiry, not in the away from them, and they do not like the report and certainly not from any of the con- fact that they will have limited opportunity to tributions of the members of this govern- be represented by the union in their work- ment—justifying why these changes are place in the future. needed. I also want to make some comments about Hidden in the detail of the government’s a member in the other place who, in deliver- new Work Choices industrial relations legis- ing his speech in this debate, suggested that lation are new rules that remove the right of the trade union numbers in the Territory had workers under industrial awards to be paid been in decline. I am not entirely sure which on a weekly, fortnightly or even monthly

CHAMBER 16 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 basis, as my colleague Senator Stephens al- Furthermore, it is family-unfriendly legisla- luded to. All provisions in awards relating to tion. This legislation is a blatant stab in the how and when employees are required to be back for Australian workers and their fami- paid will now become non-allowable. We lies. have seen it in the AWA that I have quoted Australians have never asked for this leg- from today. It does not say whether that $550 islation, and the government never told us gross is to be paid weekly, fortnightly or about this legislation at the last election. monthly—even six-monthly. This means that During the last federal election in 2004, the it will no longer be possible to include the coalition parties made no mention of scrap- following types of clauses in employment ping the award system or abolishing the no awards because, under the government’s new disadvantage test—that is, they made no IR laws, all provisions in awards relating to mention of removing protection for penalty how and when employees are required to be rates, overtime, leave loading and shift al- paid will become non-allowable. The re- lowances; nor did they make mention of requirement that employees be paid on a moving the setting of a fair minimum wage weekly or fortnightly basis will be gone. from the Industrial Relations Commission; Provisions that give employees who are paid nor did they make mention of abolishing by cheque time to cash the cheque will be unfair dismissal protection from employees gone. Provisions to enable employees to in workplaces of up to and including 100 nominate which bank their money is paid staff. into or provisions that on termination wages The Australian people do not want this must be paid within a reasonable time will be legislation which is before us here today, a gone. point that my colleagues and I will continue Labor opposes these unfair and extreme to make in this debate. But are Prime Minis- industrial relations changes and we will fight ter Howard and his colleagues listening to these changes in every city and in every ordinary Australians? No, they are not. Aus- town across the nation, until the very last tralians are now starting to see through this vote is cast on the day of the next federal Prime Minister. They are starting to see him election. We will continue to argue for pro- for what he is—out of touch with the wishes ductive and fair industrial relations that will of the Australian people. By hastily pushing return dignity, fairness and productivity into ahead with this ideologically driven bad leg- the workplace and that respect and uphold islation, this government is arrogantly and the rights of workers in this country to bar- shamelessly trampling on the wishes and gain collectively and to have fair bargaining better interests of this country’s workers and in their workplace—not Work Choices, but a their families, and the processes of parlia- fair workplace and a workplace in which the mentary democracy. More and more, this rights of workers are respected and pro- government is showing its true colours. By tected. allowing only one week for a Senate inquiry Senator KIRK (South Australia) (10.23 into a bill proposing the biggest legislative am)—I rise to speak to the Workplace Rela- change to the system of industrial relations in tions Amendment (Work Choices) Bill 2005, Australia in over 100 years, it has abused, as and to oppose these extreme and unfair laws it no doubt will continue to abuse, its Senate that will punish the most vulnerable workers majority. At nearly 700 pages, and with ex- in Australia. This is bad legislation. It is un- planatory memoranda of some 560 pages, the fair legislation and it is divisive legislation. so-called ‘Work Choices’ bill is the largest

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 17 amending bill ever considered by this par- with international treaties to which Australia is a liament. To add insult to injury, hearings party. were scheduled in the week following the We are concerned about increased inequality in closing date for submissions. It is outrageous the labour market arising from the bill. Such ine- for the government to think that this was suf- quality has already been growing in Australia. ficient time for the Senate committee to It has important social consequences, a large properly consider the 5,000 submissions that body of social research tells us, for things like it received concerning this bill. social exclusion, violence and health. During the Senate inquiry, Associate Pro- Finally, the bill reduces the existing work and fessor Barbara Pocock, a research fellow family supports in Australia, and it offers no general way forward to improve the important areas from the University of Adelaide, provided an of labour law and workplace life. This has very overview of a submission made by 151 Aus- important implications for future labour supply tralian academics. The submission repre- and for those least able to bargain for themselves, sented the views of a large, diverse group of as well as for many other Australian men, women Australian experts, including the majority of and children. senior, experienced leaders in the field—31 As I said, this submission was a summary of professors and 28 associate professors from a submission made by 151 Australian aca- 26 institutions, with expertise in the field of demics, including some 50 or 60 professors workplace issues, including the disciplines of and associate professors, from 26 Australian economics, management, business, law, psy- institutions in disciplines ranging from eco- chology and industrial relations. Associate nomics and business to law and industrial Professor Pocock summarised the submis- relations. This is not the view of just one sion as follows: academic. The proposed changes deserve a thorough pub- There is no doubt in my mind that this is lic discussion, which the government’s timetable one of the most important pieces of legisla- does not allow. These changes are, in our view, tion to come before the Senate since I be- profound, they are not evolutionary, and beyond their intended consequences the bill has potential came a senator in mid-2002. Industrial rela- for serious unintended consequences. tions legislation affects the wages, salaries, We are concerned about the issue of complex- terms of employment and family lives of all ity. One of the government’s goals is to reduce Australian workers to an extent that is almost complexity. However, the bill adds a whole raft of unsurpassed. It also has a profound effect on new complexities, so we do not view this as de- the economy and the labour market. This regulation; it is increased regulation. government has maintained, throughout its There is the question of a changing balance be- $55 million propaganda campaign, that these tween employers and employees. Employees and laws are essential to fuel economic growth employers approach the labour market with dif- and improve productivity in the work force, ferent levels of power. but it has failed dismally to make the case Internationally, labour law is designed to pro- that this bill will improve the living stan- tect workers from exploitation and to ensure basic dards of Australian workers. rights, including the right to organise and to bar- This bill does not reflect the economic and gain collectively. social realities of the Australian workplace. The bill ignores these widely accepted views Rather, it is motivated by this government’s and shifts the balance in Australian workplaces— extreme ideological and political agenda. a historic and radical change, which is in conflict This bill is a three-pronged attack on work-

CHAMBER 18 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 ing families and their way of life. Firstly, it words, that promise was ‘a rock-solid, iron- targets for destruction the wages and condi- clad guarantee’. tions of Australian workers. Secondly, it un- According to the Prime Minister, his re- dermines the Australian way of life and in cord is that wages have grown by 14.9 per particular the Australian notion of the fair go, cent in real terms since he took office, and which as we know is a fundamental part of that the minimum wage has grown by 12 per Australia’s national identity. And, thirdly, it cent in real terms. However, as the shadow attacks the trade union movement in Austra- minister for workplace relations, Mr Stephen lia. Smith, has observed, the increases in the Despite the government’s deception in its minimum wage over the last 10 years have publicly funded $55 million advertising occurred despite opposition from the gov- campaign, this bill will lead to a decrease in ernment, which has consistently opposed the minimum wage that will leave working decisions of the Industrial Relations Com- Australians worse off. By spending such an mission with respect to the minimum wage. obscene amount of public money on propa- Had the Industrial Relations Commission ganda, the Prime Minister has effectively accepted the government’s submissions, the shown that he is prepared to say, do and minimum wage would be $50 a week, or spend anything to get his extreme industrial $2,600 per year, lower than its current level. relations changes through the parliament. If the commission had accepted the govern- That amount of money, $55 million—which ment’s submissions, the minimum wage is equivalent to the annual wages of nearly would have been reduced in real terms by 1,700 registered nurses—could have been far 1.55 per cent. better spent, with a direct benefit to the over- But this bill is designed to give the gov- all wellbeing of the Australian community. ernment a new chance to drive down mini- The Prime Minister and his government mum wages through the quite inappropri- have repeatedly refused to guarantee to the ately named Fair Pay Commission. The Aus- Australian people that no worker will be tralian Industrial Relations Commission will worse off under these revolutionary changes, effectively be bypassed by way of this legis- despite continual invitations from the opposi- lation. Prime Minister Howard’s record tion for him to do so. Instead, the Prime Min- shows that we can expect to see a fall in the ister has insisted: minimum wage, a move that will spell disas- My guarantee is my record. ter for the nearly two million employees who Sadly, however, this response does little to are currently dependent upon it. The gov- generate confidence in Australian workers ernment’s attempts to drive down wages once that record is subject to scrutiny. The stem from its outdated economic view that Prime Minister’s reluctance to provide a lower wages will somehow improve flexibil- guarantee that no Australian worker will be ity and productivity. As numerous econo- worse off is all the more startling given his mists have said, there are few sound eco- enthusiasm to do so in 1996, when he intro- nomic theories to support this view. For ex- duced his last reforms to workplace relations ample, Mark Wooden, the deputy director of laws. On that occasion, the Prime Minister the respected Melbourne Institute, has ex- quite promptly declared that no Australian pressed doubts as to whether there is any employee would be worse off as a result of evidence that these new laws will boost pro- those changes. In the Prime Minister’s own ductivity.

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 19

As my colleagues have observed, the eco- breaks, incentive based payments, annual nomic basis of the government’s actions is leave loadings, allowances, penalty rates and that Australia needs to compete with India, loadings for shifts and overtime. These are China and developing nations in wages. All some of the most crucial conditions currently this amounts to is a race to the bottom, a race enjoyed by Australian workers, and they are which Australia ultimately cannot win. Labor central to their way of life. All of them may is of the view that more sophisticated solu- be taken away from Australian workers at the tions are needed to increase Australia’s inter- stroke of a pen and without any compensa- national competitiveness. As the Leader of tion. They will not be protected by law, as the Opposition has maintained, these solu- the government claims. tions involve increased investment in educa- The government’s frontal assault on the tion and training. Australia must become awards system coincides with a new and smarter. It must improve its infrastructure greater emphasis on Australian workplace and improve the skills of its workers. We agreements. Together with the abolition of simply cannot compete with India and China the no disadvantage test, AWAs are set to and others on our doorstep by lowering become the government’s new mechanism wages and diminishing conditions. Apart for the removal of fair pay and conditions. from taking steps to reduce the wages of The bill seeks to implement a radical depar- Australians, the government has introduced ture from the existing requirements under the in this bill measures that will have a damag- Industrial Relations Act by way of placing ing effect on the conditions of Australian workers on AWAs. Under the present ar- workers and their families. rangements, AWAs may be made compulsory One of the most significant changes that by an employer for new employees or for this bill makes to the workplace relations existing employees who have received a structure in Australia is its scrapping of the promotion. award structure. Under the present federal The thrusting of AWAs onto employees award system, there are 20 allowable matters and the simultaneous abolition of the no dis- governing conditions and entitlements for advantage test will be a tragedy for Austra- employees. The no disadvantage test is also lians and their families. By tearing up the no in place to ensure that any individual or col- disadvantage test, the government has en- lective agreement does not place an em- sured that workers forced onto AWAs will ployee at an overall disadvantage in com- not enjoy the protections they have under the parison with a relevant award. Under the award system. What will workers be able to changes foreshadowed in this bill, the award say about being subject to inferior condi- system and the no disadvantage test will no tions? Absolutely nothing, if they wish to longer safeguard the conditions of employ- keep their jobs. ees. The government’s experiment with AWAs The bill establishes, as a minimum stan- represents one of the greatest failures in the dard, four allowable matters in awards, in- history of workplace relations laws in Aus- cluding annual leave, personal or carers tralia. It is a source of great embarrassment leave, parental leave and ordinary hours of and disappointment to the government that work. These four minimum requirements its much trumpeted AWAs have been such a will form the basis of the government’s so- dismal failure. To date, only four per cent of called fair pay and conditions standard. At Australian workers are on AWAs. What has risk are public holidays, rest breaks, meal

CHAMBER 20 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 been the government’s response to the over- this view is to blur the distinction between whelming rejection of AWAs? Has it sought unfair and unlawful dismissal laws. to improve conditions? Has it sought to pro- The fact of the matter is that the two are vide real incentives for Australian workers to very different, particularly in terms of how enter into individual agreements? The an- they are initiated. Unlawful dismissal is a swer is a resounding no. Instead, the gov- legal remedy that requires a dismissed em- ernment’s solution to the refusal of Austra- ployee to initiate legal proceedings in the lian workers to adopt AWAs is to make them Federal Court. Only a limited number of compulsory. The government has done this rights are covered under unlawful dismissal out of frustration rather than any genuine laws, and they incur all of the high costs and attempt to reform industrial relations laws. It delays associated with legal action. By com- has done this because it is drunk with power parison, unfair dismissal laws offer a far after gaining control of the Senate, and now simpler and less costly process. Most are we are seeing how that is breeding laziness settled within two months through concilia- and cynicism. tion. Unfair dismissal claims are initiated in AWAs are a euphemism in every sense of the Australian Industrial Relations Commis- the word. They are contrary to the estab- sion. As we are aware, it is this which is be- lished system of industrial relations in Aus- ing attacked by the government. (Time ex- tralia, with its long traditions in collective pired) bargaining and enterprise bargaining. The Senator ALLISON (Victoria—Leader of title ‘workplace agreement’ is nothing short the Australian Democrats) (10.43 am)—I of deceptive. The bill does nothing to en- would like to begin this speech on the Work- courage agreement between employers and place Relations Amendment (Work Choices) their employees. Rather, it places the balance Bill 2005 by quoting Pru Goward, the Hu- in employer-employee relations firmly in man Rights and Equal Opportunity Commis- favour of employers. It provides for a work- sion’s Sex Discrimination Commissioner. At place climate in which employers will be a committee hearing into this bill, she said: able to call all the shots by insisting that em- A society is only as stable and strong as its most ployees sign away their conditions. There is fragile. no agreement at all in such a process. The Democrats hold the view that, with the I now want to turn my attention briefly to so-called Work Choices bill, the Liberal and another of the government’s attacks on the National parties are assaulting the cultural, conditions of Australian workers, and that is economic, social, institutional, legal, politi- the removal of unfair dismissal laws in Aus- cal and constitutional underpinnings of work tralia. Prime Minister Howard has manipu- arrangements in Australia. As a result, we lated public perceptions of these laws to cre- believe we are destabilising Australian soci- ate the belief that workers will maintain their ety. existing rights in relation to dismissal under The landmark Harvester case of 1907 in- the bill. The government, from the Prime stituted a basic wage for men and established Minister down, has loudly proclaimed that an industrial relations system in recognition the present unlawful dismissals regime will of the need to legislate the welfare of family remain. At the same time, it has fostered the over profits and productivity. Harvester perception that these will provide similar placed the welfare of the family at the centre safeguards to the present unfair dismissal of social economic policy from the begin- laws. The government’s aim in perpetuating

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 21 nings of Federation. Since then, the Austra- widespread take-up of new community stan- lian industrial relations system has been built dards. More importantly, this bill will have a around a framework that provides a safety detrimental effect on vulnerable and disad- net for the most vulnerable and a balance vantaged employees and job seekers. For between community standards and individual them, this bill is not fair; it is profoundly needs. unfair. HREOC Sex Discrimination Com- The need for such a system was articu- missioner Pru Goward told the committee lated by the Australian Catholic Commission that: for Employment Relations. They said: ... the bill fails to adequately protect ... workers ... some employees come to the job market disad- with disabilities, Indigenous people, people mov- vantaged and that, for them, the labour market ing between welfare dependency and paid work, will not satisfy their fundamental human needs. and those in low-paid wage jobs, for which there Their dignity requires appropriate intervention are many competitors and who consequently have and protection. There is a need for a “safety net”, little individual bargaining power. to use a contemporary term, to ameliorate some She went on to argue that the capacity for of the effects of an unrestrained labour market. more vulnerable employees to bargain effec- While there have been reforms to the indus- tively and to choose their employment ar- trial relations system over time—most re- rangements will be nonexistent. For them, cently in 1993 and 1996—the reforms have individual bargaining will be a case of ‘take maintained the core framework centred it or leave it’. She said: around a safety net of pay and conditions to Allowing employers to make employment condi- protect the vulnerable, and mechanisms to tional on an employee taking up an AWA, for balance community expectations and indi- example, means that that choice of employment vidual circumstances. Yet this bill will un- arrangements, especially for those on minimum dermine the foundations of Australia’s indus- wages, is extremely limited. The consequences are felt not only by workers but by their children trial relations system. It does this by abolish- and families. HREOC has serious concerns that, ing the no disadvantage test and replacing it once an agreement is terminated, neither that with five minimum standards, by effectively agreement nor an award is in operation, with em- abolishing the award system, by taking away ployees presumably to be covered only by the the wage-setting role of the AIRC and further standard. This means that an employer can termi- reducing its role in other areas, by abolishing nate an agreement unilaterally after the nominal unfair dismissal protection and by unfairly expiry date of the agreement and that all employ- and unnecessarily increasing the bargaining ees covered by the agreement revert to the stan- power of the employer. dard. This provides employers with a great deal of leverage over the terms and conditions of any The bill will set no maximum weekly new agreement. hours, no entitlement to a stable income, no Law professor Andrew Stewart argued that meaningful entitlement to overtime pay- the way the bill is written actually points to ments, no access to modern work and family ‘a calculated attempt by the government to standards, little or no job security for many destroy the award system and prevent it from Australians, no right to collective bargaining functioning as any meaningful form of safety and no entitlement to penalty rates for work- net’. Dr Jill Murray argued that the system ing on public holidays. While it is unlikely is: that all Australians will be made worse off by these changes, we are convinced that it will ... designed to ensure that an as yet unknown erode conditions over time and prevent the number of workers have as their only legal mini-

CHAMBER 22 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 mum entitlements the terms and conditions set out fundamental human needs to remain unsatisfied, in the Australian Fair Pay and Conditions Stan- and not to allow those burdened by such needs to dard. perish. It is also necessary to help these needy She called these jobs ‘the worst jobs’. Dr people to acquire expertise, to enter the circle of Murray rightly argues: exchange, and to develop their skills in order to make the best use of their capacities and re- In any civilised society, it is a proper function of sources. Even prior to the logic of a fair exchange the law to ensure that at an absolute minimum, of goods and the forms of justice appropriate to it, the worst jobs are ones which we are not ashamed there exists something which is due to man be- to have in Australia. These should be jobs that we cause he is man, by reason of his lofty dignity. are comfortable seeing our fellow Australians Inseparable from that required “something” is the doing and, if it comes to that, doing ourselves. possibility to survive and, at the same time, to The Democrats would argue that, unless an make an active contribution to the common good economy is genuinely in dire straits—which of humanity. Australia’s is not—economic reform is not The Democrats argue that it is important that more important than social cohesion. In any we balance employee and employer rights. If case, the preservation of social capital is cru- employers had all the power then we would cial to economic and social success in the see in many cases a race to the bottom, long run. Employment, wages and working where wages would be driven down, people conditions directly affect the standard of liv- would be forced to work longer for less and ing and quality of life of individuals and job security would be nonexistent. The social families. It is of course important that labour contract would move from cooperation to market arrangements foster the efficient use opposition and conflict. of labour and promote participation in the The government argues that the Democ- work force. But they also need to recognise rats, Labor, the Greens, academics, churches, that labour is a distinctive input to produc- welfare organisations, legal practitioners and tion and that wider social objectives and rela- the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity tionships are involved, including relation- Commission are just scaremongering. Yet we ships between work, leisure and family, pro- have evidence from New Zealand, from the viding safe workplaces and the role of work- Victorian Kennett government and from the ers in society at large. Western Australian Court government to I think the Minister for Employment and suggest that reforms similar to those in the Workplace Relations, Kevin Andrews, needs Work Choices bill will have a negative im- to be reminded of the speech by Pope John pact on disadvantaged Australians and on Paul II, who argued that human rights must Australian society overall. take precedence over the market. He said: In 1991, the New Zealand National gov- It would appear that, on the level of individual ernment at that time radically deregulated the nations and of international relations, the free industrial relations system, introducing its market is the most efficient instrument for utiliz- Employment Contracts Act. Although some ing resources and effectively responding to needs. of those reforms produced the desired out- But this is true only for those needs which are come, it is now clear that the reforms did not “solvent”, insofar as they are endowed with purchasing power, and for those resources which are produce the results hoped for by their advo- “marketable”, insofar as they are capable of ob- cates. By the end of the 1990s, New Zealand taining a satisfactory price. But there are many was a less equal society than ever before in human needs which find no place on the market. terms of income distribution. It had a lower It is a strict duty of justice and truth not to allow full-time participation rate, lower real wages

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 23 and flatter productivity, with a diaspora of up Similarly, in Victoria deregulation as a result to a quarter of its population—many of them of the Kennett reforms and the establishment in Australia—earning considerably higher of schedule 1 workers created a significant rates of pay than they could at home. low-wage sector, particularly in small work- The deregulation of the Western Austra- places and in certain industries. Schedule 1A lian industrial relations system during the workers were nearly twice as likely to be low Court government resulted in decreases in paid compared with employees on awards; wages and increased inequality, and it saw 75 per cent were not paid penalty rates for certain groups of workers worse off—in par- working weekends; 65 per cent were not paid ticular, women fared badly relative to men annual leave loadings; and only six per cent and to other women in Australia. In February were paid shift allowances. Evidence from a 1992, the WA gender pay gap was 22.5 per Victorian IR task force found that workplace cent. By May 1995, it had widened to 27.8 bargaining over entitlements was never per cent. The 2005 research paper by the achieved. Findings from the ACIRRT Victo- Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Union rian employers survey found that the trading which analysed the effect of workplace off of entitlements was not reflected in an agreements in WA found that the Workplace increase in minimum hourly pay rates. Agreements Act of 1993 contained provi- This bill dismantles the safety net and sions which were significantly inferior to other protections, and the government has those in awards. It found that, under the act, offered no alternatives to protect the disad- standard full-time working hours increased vantaged. Again, I quote from Sex Discrimi- from 38 to 40; the accepted minimum casual nation Commissioner, Ms Goward: loading of 20 per cent was reduced to 15 per The HREOC does have grave concerns about cent; junior rates applied up to the age of 21 the implications of dismantling or removing any years; and the accrual of unused sick leave significant planks of a social, legal or economic was removed, as were penalty loadings for contract in Australia which— weekend and shift work. as she correctly points out— The Western Australian Parliamentary has evolved over 100 years and around which a Secretary for Agriculture and Forestry, Mr variety of institutions, policies, cultures and gov- Anthony McRae, described the effects of the ernment programs have grown up. Unless careful 1990s reforms on the industrial relations adjustments are made to surrounding institutions, scene there. He said: laws and policies, inevitably that whole contract is challenged. There is very clear research based evidence that will show and demonstrate ... that the process Not only has this not happened but the gov- of establishing individual workplace contracts, ernment, via the Work to Welfare bill, has with the removal of awards as an underpinning stripped away the welfare safety net for wid- basis for fairness and standards across industry, owed, separated and single parents and for creates circumstances in which there becomes a people with disabilities. Not only will those downward bidding in economic terms amongst groups of people be shifted off the pension enterprises and amongst employees. That is the and onto Newstart, which will result in be- inevitable and guaranteed outcome of what the tween $29 and $106 a week less, but if they national parliament is considering ... and you do not accept a job offer they will lose finan- have Western Australia as a stark and failed example of that. cial support for eight weeks. Many of these people will be forced into low-paid jobs with

CHAMBER 24 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 fewer conditions and less flexibility and se- call it the ‘Guaranteed Food and Shelter curity. Bill’. The Work Choices bill has nothing to The government has publicly admitted do with choice. It should really be called the that the young, the unskilled and those with ‘No Choices’ or even the ‘Two Choices’ bill, little choice will have to take low-paid in- because if this bill becomes law, Australians flexible jobs to get a foot in the door. The will either have to sign an unfair contract or government argues that four out of these 10 they will not get the job. This bill is yet an- workers move onto other jobs. What about other example of how the Howard govern- the other 60 per cent who are trapped in a ment ruthlessly pursue their ideological vicious cycle of low-paid, unskilled work agendas without regard for the effects they that provides no training, no security and no will have on ordinary working Australians. flexibility to balance family needs? But the Howard government have not con- I put it to the government that the mark of fined their blatant misrepresentations to the a civilised, successful, First World liberal title of this bill. They wasted $55 million democracy is high living standards and equi- telling half-truths to the Australian public in tably shared wealth, and an egalitarian soci- their spectacularly unsuccessful propaganda ety that respects and protects the working campaign and in their ministerial press re- poor and the disadvantaged, and that has ad- leases. On 9 October, the Minister for Em- vanced working conditions. The Prime Min- ployment and Workplace Relations put out a ister has failed to provide any empirical eco- press release in which he made a number of nomic evidence to support these changes. He unqualified claims. The minister did not have has failed to provide genuine choice and he the courage to explain the Howard govern- refuses to give a guarantee that no workers ment’s position fully. Let me give you an will be worse off, because he knows that example. The minister said: poor, disadvantaged and powerless workers Under WorkChoices the new workplace relations will be worse off. It is for these reasons that I system: and my Democrats colleagues cannot possi- … … … bly support this bill. Will better balance the unfair dismissal laws Senator STERLE (Western Australia) The only way this statement could be true is (10.58 am)—I rise to speak against the if you believe that ‘balance’ means abolish- Workplace Relations Amendment (Work ing protection from being sacked harshly, Choices) Bill 2005. The irony of the title of unjustly or unfairly for around four million the bill is blatant. You could be forgiven for working Australians. This is what the minis- thinking that this bill was about giving work- ter and the rest of the Howard government ers choice in workplace relations. It is not. believe but they are too gutless to come out And the use of a phoney name highlights the and say it. Instead, they hide behind $55 mil- weakness of the government on this issue. lion worth of weasel words and an advertis- The government use irony in the titles of ing campaign that would make a Nazi propa- their bills whenever they know that they are gandist blush. If you do not want to take my taking an indefensible position on an issue. I word for it, this is what Heather Ridout of am sure that, if a Howard government minis- the bosses union, the Australian Industry ter introduced a bill into parliament requiring Group, in one of her brochures about the all Australians to be chucked in gaol and put Howard government’s changes said: on rations of bread and water, they would

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 25

The practical result of the Government’s intention right to paid sick leave, any right to paid to reform this area will be a two-tier system. Em- holidays and his right to pay for time lost ployees of smaller companies will lose all their where a workplace has become unsafe unfair dismissal rights, while employees of larger through no fault of his own, and, to top it off, companies will retain most of their existing Billy can be stood down at any time but he rights. has to give one week’s notice before he can A two-tier system! What a disgrace! Either quit. Clause 6.1 of Billy’s AWA states: you want people to be treated with dignity The contract of employment for this agreement and respect or you do not. Labor believes shall be daily hire. that workers should have the right to feel protected by the laws of this nation and Not weekly; daily. Clause 10.2 states: should be safe in the knowledge that they Where the employee is required to work outside cannot be dealt with unfairly, not because of the ordinary hours— how many workmates they have but because of 6 am to 6 pm— of who they are. Without explaining what he he will be paid at his normal hourly rate. actually means or offering a skerrick of evi- Clause 11.1 states: dence to substantiate his claims, the minister Payment for annual leave is included in the concluded his press release with the state- hourly wage rate ... and therefore the employee is ment: not entitled to any paid annual leave. The Australian Government is determined to put Clause 11.2 states: the national interest first and take the difficult decisions necessary to keep our economy strong Leave without pay will be taken when there is a and our nation secure ... downturn in the work at hand or— Herr Goebbels could not have said it better cop this Senator Joyce— himself. But let us have a look at this brave ... the Christmas holiday period. new world the Howard government has in Clause 12.1 states: store for working Australians, and instead of Payment for sick leave is included in the hourly fascist platitudes let us deal with specifics. rate and therefore the employee is not entitled to Let us look at a real Australian workplace any paid sick leave. agreement that governs the working condi- Clause 13.1 states: tions of a real Australian and let us deal with facts, not propaganda. Payment for public holidays are included in the hourly rate, and therefore the employee is not I have in my possession an Australian entitled to any paid gazetted Public Holidays. workplace agreement or AWA that has al- I think Billy got a raw deal. It is clear that ready been registered by the Office of the Billy had to sign this contract or he would Employment Advocate. The names of the not have got the job. As a former union or- parties have been removed to protect the in- ganiser I have met hundreds of people who nocent from retribution but the agreement got themselves into the same position that covers a painter in the construction industry Billy the Brush Hand has. I tried to help we will call Billy the Brush Hand. Billy the them all. What Billy needs is a union organ- Brush Hand’s boss has convinced Billy to iser to point out to him that under the award sign this AWA in exchange for a flat hourly wage rates and conditions contained in the rate of $17.50 that requires him to forfeit his national building and construction award annual leave loading, his morning tea breaks, Billy would be around $12,000 a year better his travel allowance, his overtime rates, any off than he is under the AWA he signed.

CHAMBER 26 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

When Billy was forced to accept the wages further in favour of people like Billy the and conditions in this AWA that are so much Brush Hand’s boss. The Minister for Em- lower than those of people doing the same ployment and Workplace Relations tells us job as him on other work sites, he made it that the Howard government will: harder for those workers who negotiated a ... take the difficult decisions necessary to keep better deal than he has to keep their wages our economy strong ... and conditions, because their boss is now We all remember in 1987 when the then Brit- going to be undercut by Billy’s greedy boss. ish Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, told Instead of undercutting his fellow workers’ the world: wages, Billy would have a better chance of ... there is no such thing as society. There are in- getting a better deal for himself if he stands dividual men and women, and there are families. united with his fellow workers against his own boss’s greed. I put it to the Senate that there is no such thing as the economy. There are individual I always found that, when people like working men and women, and there are Billy work out how much they are getting families. Workers are not just commodities in ripped off and how that has the effect of the service of greater profits; they are people dragging down the wages and conditions of trying to make a decent living for themselves everyone else, they choose to join the union and their families. of their fellow workers and stand up for themselves. But why would the Office of the Senators from the other states would do Employment Advocate approve such an well to note that laws such as those proposed agreement? What real meaning is there in the in this bill are not new. They were introduced no disadvantage test? The answer is that the during the 1990s by a Liberal government in Office of the Employment Advocate is not my home state of Western Australia. Liberal really independent. The last time I looked, Western Australian senators opposite will the Employment Advocate’s web site con- remember what happened to the Liberal tained a template for an AWA complete with Court government after they introduced an- voluntary overtime provisions. It is absurd tiworker laws similar to those in this bill. that the same organisation that is entrusted The people of Western Australia consigned with promoting AWAs is also responsible for the Court government at the 2001 election to compliance. But why is the Howard govern- the compost heap of history. Graham ment going to the effort to change the law if Kierath, the industrial relations minister, lost agreements as unfair as Billy the Brush his blue ribbon seat of Riverton to Labor on Hand’s are already being approved by the a 10 per cent swing—not as much as Employment Advocate? It is because the Pittwater, but still a decent swing—having Howard government knows that it is loosing the misfortune to call his own defeat while the war for the hearts and minds of people sitting next to Kerry O’Brien on ABC’s elec- who are being done over just like Billy the tion night panel. I can assure senators oppo- Brush Hand. site who were not fortunate enough to see it that the close-up shot of the last drop of Between 2002 and 2004, the percentage of blood draining from Graham Kierath’s face Australians employed under collective made for great television. agreements rose and the percentage of Aus- tralians employed under individual agree- Before government senators make the ments fell. The Howard government is wor- same mistake and end up in the compost ried by this trend, so it wants to rig the rules heap with the likes of Graham Kierath, I will

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 27 give them one last chance to learn from the bonuses, leave loadings and overtime load- lessons of history. What has been the result ings will all be up for auction under the since the Gallop Labor government repealed Howard government’s ‘No Choice’ regime. these repugnant laws in Western Australia? Government senators opposite clearly Western Australia has enjoyed a run of his- want a return to the good old days of the torically low unemployment, with an average 1930s, when workers lined up outside the unemployment rate in the four per cent range factory each day hoping to get a day’s work, for the last two years. Employment has in- with the work going to whoever was pre- creased by 130,000 jobs and Western Austra- pared to earn the least. The ACIRRT con- lia has regularly led the nation in economic cluded on page 65 of the report that: performance, achieving the highest gross ... it appears the IWAs have been used by em- state product per capita of all the states and ployers as a means of changing a number of key the highest measure of labour productivity award provisions and are more likely to be used for the last three years. Simply put, Western by employers to gain an advantage in industries Australia has become the engine room of the that are highly competitive. Australian economy. All this after laws such The Prime Minister has conceded that work- as those proposed in this bill were repealed. ers could be bullied into accepting cuts to There is plenty of evidence from the their conditions if this bill becomes law. On Western Australian experience to explain the John Laws radio program of 10 October why laws such as the ones proposed in this he said: bill were so unpopular with the people of There are nasty people who run businesses; there Western Australia. An independent report are nasty people who work for businesses. produced for the Western Australian Com- That is true. But this bill, if enacted, would missioner of Workplace Agreements by the provide a competitive advantage to the nasty ACIRRT titled A comparison of employment people who run businesses and who want to conditions in individual Workplace Agree- screw over their staff. The good bosses—and ments and Awards in Western Australia there are plenty of them; decent, hard work- found that 74 per cent of individual working small business men and women who put place agreements provided no weekend pen- their family homes on the line to create jobs alty rates of pay; 67 per cent provided no for other people; those who do the right thing overtime rates of pay; 56 per cent provided by their workers, who invest in their work- an ordinary rate of pay below the award rate; ers’ skills and provide training opportuni- 49 per cent absorbed annual leave into the ties—are the sorts of people who do not ordinary hourly rate of pay; and 75 per cent waste their time with ghouls like Peter were without a pay increase provision. Hendy or his morally corrupt outfit. Those The reason that the Western Australian in- bosses will be undercut by competitors who dividual workplace agreements were able to will take advantage of these laws to drive do this is because, like this bill, those laws down labour costs by removing penalty rates. did not contain a no disadvantage test. The Instead of competing on the efficiency of abolition of the no disadvantage test puts their production methods or the quality of hard-won job conditions up for auction. their management abilities, they will be Once the no disadvantage test has been re- competing on lower wage costs in a race to moved from the AWA system, jobs will go to the bottom, and the scungiest and least prin- whoever is prepared to give up the most. cipled bosses will be rewarded. This will Public holidays, rest breaks, meal breaks,

CHAMBER 28 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 leave the good bosses with little option but to beat-up. But we should not expect better lower their workers’ wages to compete with from Mr Randall. He is a man who likes to their nasty competitors. And this is what this parade himself around in the robes of Chris- bill is about. It is about tilting the playing tian values come election time but ignore the field in favour of the worst elements of in- concerns of church leaders once elected. We dustry by allowing the most ruthless and all remember 15 September 2004, during the nasty employers to get a competitive advan- last election campaign, when Mr Randall, the tage. member for Canning, invited the Prime Min- And yet, despite the Western Australian ister to the Perth Christian Life Centre. We experience, the Howard government contin- remember him telling the media that Chris- ues to make the false claim that this bill is tians: about improving the economy. It might be ... want to know that somebody actually has good about increasing profits for shareholders at Christian principles ... they want to know that the expense of workers, but it has nothing to they’ve got a Christian at the head of the Austra- do with improving the economy. The Gallop lian Government. Labor government dumped laws like these And well they might. But do they want and the WA economy boomed without them. someone who parades their faith when they Western Australians are used to the lies, dis- are pandering to people for votes but ignores tortions and hypocrisy of the Liberal Party. Christian principles when in office? Do they They are used to wild claims made without want someone who invokes Christian princi- any evidence, and against established facts, ples at the ballot box but turns his back on by Liberal members of parliament. the concerns expressed by church leaders On 27 November 2003, Mr Don Randall, such as Anglican Archbishop Peter Jensen the Member for Canning, gave an adjourn- and Uniting Church President, Dr Dean ment speech in the other place. Whipping Drayton, about this bill? I do not know. It is himself up into a lather, Mr Randall said: not for me to judge. It is almost a state of anarchy in the workplace in The Prime Minister and his henchmen Western Australia when you see so many strikes have long held that there is no legitimate role in so many different areas under a Labor govern- for trade unions in Australia. When they look ment. Nowhere near this level of strikes was per- at trade union members they see the enemy. petrated under the previous coalition government When I look at trade union members I see ... people—Australian mums and dads working Let us look at the truth of Mr Randall’s hard every day to raise their kids, put bread claim. In 2003, the year Mr Randall gave on their tables and make ends meet. At its that speech, there were 97 working days per heart this bill is an attack upon the living 1,000 employees lost in Western Australia standards of working Australia and on Aus- due to industrial disputes. It seems that Mr tralian families. That is why it must be op- Randall slept through 1995, during the time posed and it is why I oppose this bill. I will of the Liberal Court government, when there always stand in defence of working Austra- were 150 days per 1,000 employees lost due lians who stand together in union. to industrial disputes—97 under Labor; 150 The senators opposite are not conserva- under the Liberals. tives. They are dangerous radicals and they No-one could ever accuse Mr Randall of are trying to toss 100 years of constitutional letting the truth get in the way of a good stability out the window. That is what they

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 29 are about—tossing decency out of the win- interests of workers, not in the best interests dow; tossing fairness out the window. These of their families and not in the best interests Tory tossers are willing to toss out the safe- of Australia. It is the biggest attack on the guards that have protected Australian work- rights of Australian workers in 100 years. ing families from the worst elements of ex- Three weeks ago more than 500,000 Aus- ploitation for no other reason than they hate tralian workers made a stand opposing the people who stand together in union asking introduction of the Howard government’s for a fair share of the profits of their labour. Work Choices bill, and thousands more have The senators opposite, lackeys and bootlicks voiced their opposition to it. But the gov- one and all, sucking on the teats of their cor- ernment refuse to listen. They have ignored porate masters in the Australian Chamber of the concerns raised by the Australian com- Commerce and Industry, will be judged by munity—churches, unions, social welfare the Australian— agencies, workers and their families, aca- Senator Kemp—Mr Acting Deputy demics, and many good employers—about President, I rise on a point of order. I do not the adverse impact these changes will have normally rise to take points of order on these. on Australian workers and their families. We know that the senator is a paid-up union They have failed to guarantee that wages will member and he has just been reading out— be sustained or increased in real terms under The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT these changes and they have failed to provide (Senator Marshall)—What is your point of a guarantee that no individual Australian order, Senator Kemp? employee will be worse off. They have ignored the concerns raised about the likely Senator Kemp—The disgraceful attack impact of the legislation, particularly on the on the people in the chamber. He said sena- poor, the disadvantaged, the vulnerable and tors were bootlickers and used other abso- the hundreds of thousands of Australian lutely appalling language. We do not speak families. of our colleagues in this chamber the way you speak to your colleagues in trades hall. I Only this week, Catholic Archbishop of ask that those comments be withdrawn. Sydney, Cardinal George Pell, said in an article published in the Sunday Telegraph: The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— Senator Sterle, I would ask you to withdraw This Bill will increase the “Americanisation” of those references. the Australian workplace in some unfortunate ways through its hostility to unions and by further Senator STERLE—I will withdraw those increasing the wage differentials between the very references. But it is all right for senators on rich and prosperous and those battlers at the other the other side to attack union leaders and end of the spectrum. their families. I am a very proud member of He went on to say: the Transport Workers Union. The senators When the new nation of Australia set a “basic opposite will be judged by the Australian wage” for all its workers in 1907, it was to enable people at the ballot box, just as the West a family with three children to live in “frugal Australian Liberal Court government was, comfort”. and I cannot wait for the fight. In the proposed legislation, there is no such em- Senator WORTLEY (South Australia) phasis on fairness. (11.17 am)—Labor oppose the Workplace In the submission by Sydney’s Anglican Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Bill Archbishop, Dr Peter Jensen, to the Senate 2005 because we know it is not in the best inquiry into this bill—the inquiry that was

CHAMBER 30 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 restricted by its time frame and its terms of days paid leave, accumulating for personal reference—he said in part: sickness but capped at 10 days per annum for ... vulnerable workers, or those who have less caring purposes; and 38 ordinary hours of bargaining power, need to be protected from the work per week that can be averaged over 12 effects of any reforms. For example, the unequal months. This means you could work 20 bargaining position of some workers and the in- hours one week and 50 the next. experience of new entrants to the workforce The government tells us what the legisla- means that some potentially could be taken advantage of. Traditionally, unions and the Austra- tion protects—and it is only five condi- lian Industrial Relations Commission have played tions—but it does not tell us what it does an important role in our community in protecting away with. The reality is that there is no such workers. We would wish to see such protec- choice for workers with the government’s tion continue to ensure that employers’ power is Work Choices legislation. Workers’ bargain- not increased at the expense of those with less ing power will be removed, resulting in what bargaining power. will be, in many cases, ‘accept it or don’t The submission by the Reverend Dr Wans- take the job’ or ‘accept the pay and condi- borough from the Uniting Church in Austra- tions’. That is all that is on offer. lia states: Where an award contains superior provi- We believe this system of work choices does sions to those in legislation, these will be not give workers any more choice, and it limits retained initially in existing awards and the income they derive from having fewer choices agreements. However, employers can ex- and being expected to work a wider range of clude these superior provisions in new agree- hours. They lose the shared time but they also do ments and individual contracts. Other exclu- not recompense for having lost it, so they lose out both ways as families. sions include skill based career paths, restrictions for trainees, enterprise flexibility provi- Here in Canberra this week a church vigil sions and trade union training leave. In the outside Parliament House attended by repre- event of a redundancy payment, where an sentatives from the Quakers, Baptists and the employer offers alternative employment, Uniting Church expressed concerns that the even at lower pay, and is rejected, the em- bill will result in the erosion of quality fam- ployee is not entitled to redundancy pay. ily and leisure time for many Australians and will undermine the balance between em- An award review task force will further ployer and employee rights. When we listen reduce conditions under the guise of improv- to representative organisations, much of what ing productivity and employment. With the we hear is the same concerns raised by Labor changes implemented by this government, members, minor parties, unions and many the classification rates and casual loadings other members of our community. will be rationalised and there will be fewer rates. The concept of skill based salaries will Australian workers currently have an become redundant. Gradings, levels and award system with 20 pay and conditions classifications stand to become a single standards that are protected by law. When minimum rate. Individuals will be forced this bill is passed this will be reduced to just into a position of negotiating and justifying five. The five guaranteed conditions are: a claims for higher than the single minimum minimum wage of $484.40 per week; annual rate of pay. The task force will examine ex- leave of four weeks, with an option to cash isting federal awards to recommend rational- out two weeks; 12 months unpaid parental ising these awards too. leave between parents; personal leave of 10

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 31

Today, many workers are covered by un- legislation in place which affords workers ion-negotiated certified agreements that con- rights and protections. It is their choice as to tain conditions well above the award mini- whether they access those rights and avenues mum. These agreements can replace the of protection and compensation. But the di- award entirely or they can sit on top of the vide between rights and protection will be award. In either case, the agreement must grossly widened with the introduction of this pass the no disadvantage test. This means legislation. Workers have reason to be con- that on an overall basis the terms of the cerned about the changes. Some of the agreement must be at least as good as the changes will be felt within weeks of this leg- award conditions. Currently, agreements se- islation going through; other changes will cure rights for a set period and continue un- impact in the months and the years to come. changed if not renegotiated after the expiry The reality is that, in practice, under this leg- date. Under the Liberal government’s islation, most workers will not have access to changes, after the agreement expires, em- unfair dismissal provisions. The employer ployers can terminate the agreement and put will not even have to provide employees their employees on non-union-negotiated with a reason for sacking them. ‘Partly op- agreements that contain fewer and poorer erational reasons’ are relatively simple to conditions. And existing agreements are not justify. able to be varied or extended once the bill is This government’s attack on the working in place. conditions and rights of workers is an attack Australian workers deserve to have job on the security of working families and the security and decent working conditions, but values of Australian society. It is an attack on the Howard government intends to strip them the conditions and job security that we of both of these and more. This government should be protecting for our children, for intends to strip away the rights of workers future generations. The bill will erode the and replace them with uncertainty and re- rights and entitlements of workers, particu- duced working conditions, and the removal larly for those who do not have strong bar- of job security—rights that workers, their gaining power—the young entering the work parents and their grandparents fought for; force, single parents, the unskilled and mi- working conditions and job security that grants. The effects will be devastating— Australian workers deserve. It will take away devastating to them and devastating to their their freedom of speech to voice their opin- families. The government argues individuals ion in the workplace for fear of the ramifica- will be able to negotiate their own conditions. I know this because I have already tions, but the power of an individual to bar- heard from workers whose bosses and lead- gain with a new employer is less than the ing hands are saying, ‘Wait until the IR collective force of all employees. changes go through.’ This is what is feeding Australian workers are worried, with sur- the fear of many workers about the impact of veys revealing more than 70 per cent of the Work Choices bill—the everyday reality workers believe the changes are bad. The of what goes on in their workplaces. government has spent $55 million that we Even today in some workplaces, workers know about of taxpayers’ money to fund are unfairly dismissed, workplace bullying Liberal Party ads in an attempt to convince exists and workers are fearful of claiming taxpayers, workers, that the changes will not overtime that is rightfully owed to them. The hurt; that it will not hurt losing the Australian current system is not perfect, but there is Industrial Relations Commission—the inde-

CHAMBER 32 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 pendent umpire—penalty rates, holiday leave changes are nothing for workers to look for- and redundancy pay; that it will not hurt los- ward to. ing the no disadvantage test that applies to The government says the minimum wage current agreements, the fairness of the na- will remain. But for how long will the mini- tional wage case and the foundation of a fair mum wage remain at the current rate? The system of enterprise agreements; that it will Liberal senators opposite do not appear to not hurt having your hours of work changed understand what it is like to work for a without reasonable notice, and losing the weekly wage, to rely on penalty rates and right to file for unfair dismissal with access overtime in order to meet the mortgage or to reinstatement and compensation; and that rent payment, to pay medical bills, to buy it will not hurt having the national wage case shoes for the kids and to put fresh food on delayed and abolishing the annual wage in- the table each day. They might know of peo- creases made by the Australian Industrial ple or have heard about people in this situa- Relations Commission. Australian workers tion, but how many of them have sat down at are going to be the losers as a result of these their dinner table in recent times with people extreme changes to Australia’s industrial in this sort of situation? This bill denies Aus- relations system, and it will hurt both work- tralian workers a choice to bargain collec- ers and their families. tively with their employer for decent wages The government talks about providing and conditions. It denies the individual the flexibility in the workplace. We do not need right to reject individual contracts which cut to change the laws to enjoy flexibility in the pay and conditions and undermine collective workplace. There already exists flexibility to bargaining and union representation. It says improve work practices and receive higher that it is okay for individual contracts to un- pay. The employer can offer better than the dermine the rights of workers under collec- award. The award is the safety net. tive agreements and awards; that it is okay to Under the current Workplace Relations eliminate overtime, penalty rates and shift Act there is nothing to stop workers negotiat- loading. ing better conditions with their employers. The bill removes the role of the Australian However, there is not the capacity to negoti- Industrial Relations Commission in handing ate below minimum standards of wages and down the minimum wage decision and hands working conditions because we have in place it over to the government’s so-called Austra- the no disadvantage test. Workers have pro- lian Fair Pay Commission. Do you like the tection. But, under the government’s Work words ‘Fair Pay Commission’? We already Choices, when a worker starts a new job, the know how the government views increases agreement need only meet the Australian fair in the minimum wage. The Prime Minister pay and conditions standard, which has says he stands by his record. We only have to fewer entitlements than the award, does not look at the record. If the Howard government include overtime loading and penalty rates had its way, the minimum wage would be and would likely result in lower take-home $50 a week less than what it currently is— pay and reduced working conditions. The that is, Australian working families on the changes proposed in this bill make it easier minimum wage would be $2,600 a year to cut take-home pay, dismiss workers with- worse off—$2,600 a year down on their an- out compensation and restructure the busi- nual pay packet. Had the government’s sub- ness. With rights and conditions reduced, the missions to the Australian Industrial Rela- tions Commission been awarded, the current

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 33 minimum wage would be $434.40 instead of their representatives and puts them in the the $484.40 that it currently is—$50 per hands of the minister. It prohibits workplace week less without the decision of the Austra- agreements from including what the minis- lian Industrial Relations Commission, whose ter—the Liberal minister—decides is ‘pro- role in these decisions under the new legisla- hibited content’. tion has been removed. In four of the nine And it goes further. Under the bill it is an long years that this government has been in offence to even attempt to negotiate anything power, the government proposed a minimum the minister—the Liberal minister— wage increase less than its own inflation prohibits. And unions, as representatives of forecast. Had it been successful, it would workers, can be fined $33,000 if they ask an have resulted in a drop in the minimum wage employer to include a provision in an agree- in real terms on these occasions. ment that protects the workers from unfair And now, under the government’s new dismissal—we are not talking about fair system of Work Choices, the next national dismissal; we are talking about unfair dis- minimum wage increase, which will be de- missal—or for a commitment to collective termined by the so-named Fair Pay Commis- bargaining. Only yesterday, in South Austra- sion, will be at least six months later than lia’s daily newspaper, the Advertiser, Kym normal. This means that Australia’s more Richardson, the federal Liberal member for than 1.6 million lowest paid employees will Kingston, a marginal seat in South Australia have to wait at least 18 months for a pay in- which takes in the southern suburbs, includ- crease to be considered. And, unlike the cur- ing Morphett Vale, Christies Beach, Hack- rent system, there is no requirement for the ham, Christie Downs, Old Noarlunga and Australian Fair Pay Commission to have re- Reynella, said that a significant number of gard to fairness in providing a safety net for constituents feared being exploited under the the low paid—either fairness in meeting new legislation. ‘Change and uncertainty are needs or fairness in the context of commu- the two biggest factors of the hesitation to- nity standards. wards the industrial relations changes,’ he We know what the government thinks of said. And his Liberal colleague in the West- this system. In October of this year, in a re- ern Sydney seat of Lindsay said, ‘The work- port by government senators on the workers’ concerns are they will be exploited.’ So place agreements inquiry conducted by the here we have two Liberal members of par- Senate Employment, Workplace Relations liament using the words ‘uncertainty’ and and Education References Committee, they ‘exploited’ in relation to the Work Choices told us: bill. ... party senators take the view here that safety-net So the Liberal government introduces leg- awards are probably too high—a matter to be islation which will impact greatly on the addressed in the forthcoming legislation—and lives of working Australians. The federal that this causes serious distortion in the wage members receive hundreds of emails and structure, leading to discouragement of employ- letters of concern. They know thousands ment. have signed petitions, they see tens of thou- So this government does not shy away from sands of people, their constituents, many of saying that it thinks Australian workers on whom voted for them, on their television awards are already being paid too much. But screen standing united against the legislation the negative impact of the bill does not end in their respective cities, and they are wor- here. It takes away rights from workers and ried. So, what do they do? They suggest es-

CHAMBER 34 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 tablishing a hotline to dob in the bosses. Let that purports to talk about choices for work- us consider how this hotline might work. The ers—and not just workers who are working worker rings up, leaves their name, provides now but workers into the future in this coun- details of their workplace, the name of their try. My first point of opposition is that I op- boss and their concerns. A new departmental pose the title. It is wrong, false and mislead- inspector is given the information. The coming. plaint is investigated. The boss gets wind of Mr Acting Deputy President, you know it. The worker gets sacked, not that week but that in this place I try very often to find areas within a short time. Where is the worker’s on which we can all agree. As a representa- right to unfair dismissal? It is gone. It does tive of the people of Queensland, I consis- not exist because the Liberal government tently look at legislation that comes before stripped it away. The boss will not come out the Senate to consider where we, across the and say that employees were sacked for their whole range of government, opposition and actions but, under the new legislation, partly smaller parties, can find agreement. I try and operational reasons will suffice. find areas on which we can work together so The member for Kingston and the member that we can come up with legislation about for Lindsay know that the workers, their which we can stand proudly before the peo- constituents, are concerned about the ple who vote both for us and against us and changes to the workplace legislation. These say, ‘We are taking these actions for Austra- workers needed their elected representatives lians.’ But on this particular piece of legisla- to vote against the government’s extreme tion I cannot find any common ground. changes that will impact on their conditions This is one of the few pieces of legislation and pay. But, along with their Liberal col- that has come before the house in the short leagues, they supported the changes and period since I was elected where there is many workers and their families will suffer such a great gap between the positions being because of it. Labor will fight for a strong taken by the government and those on this safety net of minimum award wages and side of the house that it is actually a thresh- conditions, for an independent umpire and old piece of legislation. There is no agree- for proper rights for workers who are dis- ment on the values basis on which the deci- missed unfairly. Labor will stand up for the sions have been put forward. On the content, right of workers to bargain collectively for the background and the whole philosophical decent wages and conditions and for the right basis, there is so much difference that there to object to individual contracts. (Time ex- is no common ground. There is but one ac- pired) tion for people on this side of the house to Senator MOORE (Queensland) (11.37 take, and that is to oppose it. am)—I am very proud to stand here this But I think it is important to give some in- morning to speak in opposition to the Work- dication on the record of exactly what the place Relations Amendment (Work Choices) opposition means. There are so many things Bill 2005. It is always important to be very about this process that I find not just wrong clear at the start about which way you are but offensive. I will begin with my frustra- thinking on any form of legislation. Just for tion about the way the people from the gov- the record: I am opposing the falsely named ernment, rather than argue the value of the Work Choices bill. We have heard on numer- legislation, consistently seek to label and ous occasions in this place about the use of attack the people who think differently to language. Here we have a piece of legislation

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 35 them. Of course, that can be seen as ‘robust pendent thought. So one of the first things to debate’ and I have heard it described as such. which I object—apart from the erroneous I do not agree with that term. There should title of the legislation—is the tendency to use be at least some mutual respect. People can personal attack rather than to look at the ac- disagree but treat with respect the people tual arguments we should be discussing. On with whom they disagree. that basis, I say I am a trade unionist and I But in this place, through hours of discus- am proud of it. I think there is something we sion, both in this period of debate and in pre- can all learn from taking on representative vious ones, about the best the government roles. It should not be a term of abuse. can do when talking about people from this With regard to the process we are working side of the house who think differently to with in this place, the thing that most appals them is to call us union hacks and to say that me about what has happened in this discus- we are but dancing to the tune of our mas- sion about industrial relations is the sham ters. Perhaps sometimes I do dance, but not attempt at consultation through the commit- to the tune of my masters—I reject the term tee process. I will not go into detail here, ‘masters’ and I reject strongly any allegation because we have heard numerous people that people on this side of the house are mas- who sit on the relevant Senate committee tered by anyone. talk about how they felt betrayed by the lack I am a proud trade unionist. I have been of time, the lack of understanding and the one from the time I commenced work in the lack of genuine respect that was given to the Australian Public Service. I was a member of large number of Australians who wanted to my trade union and then I was fortunate partake in the Senate committee inquiry. enough to be elected as an official to the un- We should have known that was going to ion that serves the Australian Public Service. happen, because when the committee was Yes, I am one of those people on this side of reluctantly formed—and I state again that it the house—I forget what the total is this was reluctantly formed, because I think there morning, but I am aware that there are a high is some understanding of the background and number of us—who proudly and publicly the strong history of Senate process—the say, without any hope or intent of trying to very first step was to list all the issues, the cover it up, that we have worked as trade key industrial issues, that could not be dis- unionists. That is a great job. It is a job that cussed, that were withdrawn from the terms carries with it a degree of respect and re- of reference. I am surprised that the terms of sponsibility. It is one that I think should be reference did not just say, ‘Please come in understood and respected rather than used as and agree with the government.’ That would some kind of criticism. have been the expectation of the government Senator Kemp—And it carries with it the in putting them together. prospect of a Senate seat. There was a very short time for members Senator MOORE—Not in my case, of the community to put forward their con- Senator, but I don’t know about others. But cerns, their arguments, about what was of we do not label people from the other side of value and what was not of value in the new the house. We do not tend to presume that, Work Choices bill. At the end of that time, just because they have a certain employment unsurprisingly, a report was put out. We got background or philosophical background, it only at the beginning of this week. That is they have not got the capability for inde- a very short time for people to be able to see

CHAMBER 36 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 exactly what the key arguments of the debate plementary payments that they receive on are going to be. But we did get it and it has top of their core wage. The government seem been widely circulated and, to no-one’s sur- to understand only the concept of a flat prise, there are differing opinions that come wage. They have no understanding about the out in it. various things that come together to form The really sad part about all those com- your weekly, fortnightly or monthly income, ments is the fact that there is no way that the depending on how you are going to be paid. government can pretend that they have not That is an issue in itself. No-one is quite sure been informed about the concerns that the exactly how people will be paid under the Australian people have. I am prepared to say new arrangements. There is no clear com- that they may not understand them, but there mitment on how people are going to be is no way that they can say that they do not paid—that is, weekly, fortnightly or what- know about them. Anyone can see by look- ever. That regular payment is the lifeblood of ing on the parliamentary committee’s web so many Australians. They live from payday site the wide range of community organisa- to payday. Some of them manage so effec- tions, employer groups and employee repre- tively that, when we are fortunate enough to sentatives—citizens of the country—who meet with them in our work and also in the were concerned about how this legislation committee process, their stories about the will impact on them and their families into way they manage their lives are astounding. the future. Every cent is accounted for. The way that this legislation can—not may or not even One of the issues that came up the most will, I hope—affect that security is genuinely was not only concern about what is happen- terrifying for many Australians. People were ing now but also concern about the fact that, seeking some reassurance from the govern- as a result of the current electoral position, ment about security. this legislation will get up. There was an understanding that that will happen and that With regard to the general process, one of that will mean major changes to the way that the most frustrating aspects of the last couple industrial relations operates in this country, of months from my point of view has been Overwhelmingly, the issue that came up for the number of people who have spoken to me in reading the many submissions was that me and said, ‘We didn’t know they were go- people are afraid for their families into the ing to do this.’ You learn very quickly in this future. They wanted some kind of statement job not to speak immediately but to take a or understanding from their government that breath and then give a response—and that is the issues that they were raising were not just what I had to do when people said that to me. to be dismissed, tossed away or talked about Of course the government were going to do as just ideological difference. They wanted this! There was no doubt. We knew that just an understanding about the major issues. from reading the histories of various people in the Liberal Party-National Party coalition We have heard from other people con- at the moment—and from the histories of cerned about the issues of security in the many people in government going back prior workplace. That came up consistently. These to the early eighties. We know that there is a people were concerned about appropriate strong commitment to deregulating the work wage rates and penalties. We have heard so force. For them, that means taking away any much evidence about the way people in our regulation or obstacle or anything that will community are totally reliant on those sup- put barriers around the open market freedom

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 37 of any activity—in this case, the work force That is true. However, the workplace and the way industrial relations operates. changes that are being recommended in this Regulation is seen as obstruction by many piece of legislation are very similar to those people who are arguing to bring in this legis- that the government wished to introduce in lation. Any form of law or protection is seen this place in 1996 and were not able to be- to automatically be in conflict with the con- cause of the very extensive Senate process cept that is most regularly promoted as the which resulted in numerous amendments to most important thing in this new change, what was then on the table. We on this side namely, the ‘f’ word—that is, ‘flexibility’. of the house and those in the community did The master of this legislation is the term argue at the time against many of the same ‘flexibility’. Anything that can be perceived things that are being put forward now, only to impede open flexibility in any way is seen this time the proposed changes are at an even as evil and to be destroyed. The process that greater level. We used many of the same ar- we have to follow here is working with the guments about the impact of workers’ secu- community to ensure that they understand rity and workers’ families as we are using their entitlements and their rights as workers. now. The key point, which we need to state That key element is lost in this legislation. In so often—and I never tire of stating the is- the quest for flexibility, there is an open pre- sue—is the need for respect: respect for peo- sumption that there is an equal powerbase in ple as individuals, respect for people as every workplace—that is, that employers and workers and respect for people as employers. employees will be able to sit down together But that issue is not anywhere to be seen in in an equal and open arrangement and be this legislation. It is not in the legislation able to effectively negotiate all their condi- and, to the best of my knowledge, it is not in tions of service, their wage expectations and the unwritten, yet-to-be-seen regulations, their future employment options. That is a which we yearn to see so that we can see situation that we could all seek. what all the detail is going to be. We have heard the paean of praise from so The government is committed to having many government senators when they talk simpler legislation and structures—we hear about how many jobs and how few industrial that regularly. As an ex public servant, one of disputations there are at the moment and how the real tests you apply when you are looking strong the labour market currently is. All at legislation is to see, first of all, whether it these things are being valued strongly by the is simple to read. This one does not pass that government before they impose the Work test; this legislation is not simple to read. Choices bill. One would ask: if things are One of the expectations was that this was going so well, why is there a need to imple- going to make people’s access to understand- ment such an overwhelming change? In con- ing their rights much easier. I encourage tributions we have heard in this place, we people to have a look on the internet and hear that in the past people on this side of the read this legislation, and then let the gov- house have consistently argued against any ernment know whether you understand ex- industrial relations changes brought forward actly what your rights are—either as an em- by the government and we have been told ployer or as an employee. Read the legisla- that, despite the opposition that we have put tion. But, if you find the legislation a little forward and despite the arguments that we confronting, go to the explanatory memoran- have raised about people’s workplace condi- dum, because another little trick you learn is tions, the sky has not fallen. that when the explanatory memorandum is

CHAMBER 38 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 bigger than the legislation you have a bit of a fact that they did not take away one of my problem on your hands. And that is the case favourite pieces of music this time. with the Work Choices bill. To wade through There are so many arguments against this the Work Choices explanatory memorandum legislation. I would like to mention the issues is not a simple task. I accept that legislation to do with women, although I know previous is complex. I accept that this is a very diffi- speakers have spoken about the major con- cult change. But one of the arguments being cerns they have about how this legislation put forward, consistently, about why we need will impact on women. In my first speech in this change is to make it simpler, to make it this place, I talked about Emma Miller from more accessible. I am not a lawyer—I would Queensland, who is one of the founding be proud to be one, but I am not—but I ten- mothers of trade unionism and the peace der exhibit A: the legislation and its explana- movement in this country. Each year in tory memorandum. This is not a simple piece Queensland we celebrate women in trade of legislation. It does not meet that particular unions through the Emma Miller Awards. test. And every year we have unions nominate I talk to the community people who come women from their membership to celebrate to see me—and I know that there have been with them achievements they have had in efforts to lobby people from the government their workplaces and in their lives, linked to as well—raising the concerns that I men- their union. tioned earlier. I know that you have heard When we had the Emma Miller Awards a them, although I remain unconvinced that couple of weeks ago, we had eight women you have understood them. When people standing up to say, ‘Thank you. I represent come, I ask them about how they found the my union, and this is what it means to me to government advertising campaign. We have be a unionist.’ They talked consistently about been blessed by the government’s advertising the values of solidarity, of working together campaign: a $55 million—and rising— to form something stronger. I know that advertising campaign, plus the supplemen- Senator Faulkner quoted last time, ‘United tary efforts by various employer bodies that we bargain, divided we fall,’ which is some- we have received in our mailboxes and on thing that is an important value base. In our TV screens, particularly during the terms of the difference I noted at the begin- cricket. In this one we are seeing the happy, ning of this contribution, there is such a dif- smiling faces and, again, dancing in the ference, a gap, in the value bases between workplace—I wonder where all this dancing the government and opposition on this point comes from, sometimes. In terms of the that it is impossible to find common ground. process, at least this time the message was As the women were speaking about what ‘Just trust the government’. I think we could it meant to them, they were talking about get rid of everything else; the message was how their history affected how they saw their ‘Trust the government’. I am not convinced futures. They stated that they felt that the that message has been heard. The only good contributions that the Australian workplace thing I can say about this advertising cam- system had achieved over the previous years paign is that it has not caused me to dislike were of value to all Australians. They talked one of my favourite pieces of music, which a about the issues of maternity leave and pa- previous advertising campaign did—the ternity leave and their ability to obtain those campaign on the GST. I actually applaud the in their workplaces. The fact that these hard-

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 39 won conditions can in any way be at risk is a vulnerable hold out their hands and hope for deep worry to very many people. It is beyond some crumbs. The government attempts to a philosophical difference. It is something defend its decrepit view of the world with which should be guaranteed for workers in rhetoric as tired as the legislation— the Australian community. Senator Kemp interjecting— We should have work choices in our Senator McEWEN—with rhetoric as community. No-one from this side of the tired as Senator Kemp’s blathering on about house wants to necessarily impose conditions unions. But Australians are not buying the or wages that would be harmful or destruc- government’s claims that their new system tive in any way. What we want are these will be flexible, simple and fair. Australians work choices to be cooperatively decided, are not buying the Prime Minister’s weasel rather than imposed on people with the threat words about his record being his defence that, if you do not work with this choice, you when he is asked a hard question about will not have the choice to work. (Time ex- whether or not any Australian worker will be pired) worse off as a result of this legislation. Aus- Senator McEWEN (South Australia) tralians did not buy those happy, smiley peo- (11.57 am)—I am proud to stand here today ple in those $55 million adverts and they and say that Labor opposes this bill, the know that this is sneaky, nasty and bad legis- Workplace Relations Amendment (Work lation. Choices) Bill 2005. I am also proud to say: We are told that Australia needs these new yes, I am a fully paid-up member of my trade industrial relations laws, despite the fact that union and, yes, I was a trade union boss. there is no solid economic evidence to sup- Over here, on this side, we cannot wait for port the alleged benefits of this legislation. the day that Labor Prime Minister Kim And none of the submissions to the all-too- Beazley tears up this legislation and throws it brief inquiry into this legislation provided in the bin. And there will be a queue of La- any sustainable reason for needing radical bor senators ready to throw the match that change to our system of workplace regula- will incinerate it. tion. Indeed, those opposite keep telling us Once again, this government is arrogantly things are good under the current system: using its majority to ram through extreme wages have increased, they say; unemploy- legislation that the people of Australia over- ment is down; and industrial disputation is at whelmingly reject—despite the fact that the its lowest level for 90 years. They conven- government spent $55 million of taxpayers’ iently ignore, of course, that, if the Howard money trying to make people accept it. Once government’s submission to the annual again, the government is treating the Austra- safety net adjustment wage case were taken lian people with contempt so that the Prime on board by the Australian Industrial Rela- Minister will see realised his lifelong dream tions Commission, Australian workers on the of wrecking an industrial relations system minimum wage would have been that is based on the core principle of a fair go $2½ thousand per year worse off. If things for workers. His ancient, tired, patronising are so good, why do we need these radical vision for Australia is about to come true. changes; why do we need these extreme His vision of Australia is of an Australia changes? where the wealthy and the powerful get more There is no justification in precedent out- wealth and more power, and the poor and the comes, either. Where similar laws have been

CHAMBER 40 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 tried before, close to home in Western Aus- take action because they have been unfairly tralia and New Zealand, there was not some dismissed. And, if Senator Barnaby ‘Door- economic nirvana as a result, certainly not a mat’ Joyce thinks an amendment that says social nirvana. More New Zealanders than workers cannot be sacked for refusing to ever flocked to Australia, where they could work on Good Friday or Christmas Day is earn a reasonable wage. The Western Austra- going to actually protect— lian Labor government did not hesitate to Senator Ian Campbell—Mr Acting Dep- repeal that state’s Liberal government work- uty President, on a point of order: could I place relations laws that were supposed to have you rule on whether it is appropriate to deliver an economic bonanza in that state. put the word ‘doormat’ in front of another Instead, those Liberal laws drove down honourable senator’s name, or is that against wages so that Western Australians ended up standing orders? with a minimum wage $50 less than that in The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT the rest of Australia, a position that the West- (Senator Chapman)—I would suggest that ern Australian government is successfully it is unparliamentary to refer to an honour- addressing by restoring balance to the workable senator in that way and I ask Senator place relations system in that state. McEwen to withdraw that comment. There is no justification for these changes, Senator McEWEN—I withdraw that because this legislation is all about driving comment. And I say that, if that doormat, down wages. It is about putting more power Senator Barnaby Joyce, thinks an amend- in the hands of employers and destroying ment that says workers cannot be sacked for collectivism and community in the work- refusing— place—that is, the principle of working together in a collective, the principle of every- Senator Ian Campbell—Mr Acting Dep- body helping each other so that everyone uty President, on the point of order: the sena- benefits, particularly those who need assis- tor is now defying your ruling. Could you tance. It is not a principle that those opposite either ask the senator to respect your ruling care for. It is not something they are re- and withdraw her comment unreservedly, or motely interested in. They prefer a dog-eat- take relevant action under the standing or- dog world where the industrially weak and ders. economically vulnerable get stomped on and The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— then get patronisingly told it is good for Senator McEwen, I had an indication from them. If this workplace relations legislation you that you were withdrawing that com- is not enough of an indication of that, you ment, but then you proceeded to reinforce it. only have to look at their so-called Welfare Senator George Campbell—Mr Acting to Work legislation, which will punish people Deputy President, on the point of order: I can for being disabled or single supporting par- understand Senator Ian Campbell’s sensitiv- ents. ity—in fact, he has been extremely sensitive Of course, of all the rhetoric and weasel over the past two days in this chamber—but, words we hear from the government, it is the if you would like to go back and look at the ‘choice’ bit of Work Choices that is the most record, I think you will find that the word galling. This government has a peculiar in- ‘doormat’ has been used consistently in this terpretation of ‘choice’, I have to say. Under chamber for a very long time, particularly in this legislation, more than 3½ million Aus- reference to Senator Alston, who was con- tralians will have no choice if they want to stantly referred to as a doormat. Not once

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 41 was the use of that language ruled as being cess. And there will be no choice if you start unparliamentary. So I would ask you to at a new workplace where the employer has check the record to see whether or not your negotiated a greenfields agreement with him- ruling is in fact correct. self—and, if the government accepts the rec- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— ommendations of its mates to extend I have ruled that it is an inappropriate reflec- greenfields agreements to five years, you are tion on a member of this chamber, and I going to be stuck with those conditions for would ask Senator McEwen to withdraw it, five years. There will be no choice for em- as she indicated she was doing but then pro- ployers when they get caught in the race to ceeded to reinforce it rather than withdraw it. the bottom that this legislation will inevitably lead to. So much for choice: 1,250 pages Senator McEWEN—I withdraw my of amendments and explanatory memoranda comment about Senator Barnaby Joyce. If that say that people will actually have less any of the doormats over that side of the choice. chamber think that an amendment that says that workers cannot be sacked for refusing to Talk to representatives of working people work on Good Friday or Christmas Day is and they will be scratching their heads about going to actually protect anyone, they are some of the garbage that has been spouted by living in la la land. Of course no employer the government as justification for this legis- will admit that that is the reason for sacking lation. Take for example the statement that someone; they will invent some excuse like the award system is inflexible. The inference work performance, a lack of work or a re- is that somehow awards prevent employers structure. And, if they have got 100 or fewer from rewarding their staff for a job well done employees, there is nothing a worker can do or from offering family-friendly arrange- about it. ments to employees. Awards are only minimum standards. Admittedly, they are much Workers will not have the choice of stay- better minimum standards than what the gov- ing on an award if their new employer offers ernment wants to replace awards with via its them an AWA. Workers will not have the take-it-or-leave-it AWAs, but under the cur- choice of including some things in their rent system employers only have to pay the workplace agreement, whether individual or minimum. If they want to pay more under collective, even if their employer agrees to it. the current system, if they want to give better There will be plenty of choice for the minis- provisions under the current system, they ter, though—plenty of choice for the Minis- can. ter for Employment and Workplace Rela- tions. He can choose to outlaw whatever he In my experience as a union official, em- likes if parliament agrees to it, and that ployers have always been able to pay more, bunch of doormats over there will undoubt- give bonuses or extra conditions, or accom- edly agree to whatever the minister wants to modate family needs. They can do this put in his regulations. within the current system of awards and agreements. For example, in local govern- There will be no choice to be in a collec- ment in South Australia there are huge skills tive agreement if your employer refuses to shortages in some areas of expertise like negotiate with you and your workmates. planning and environmental health—no There will be no choice to stay in a state in- doubt some of those 195,000 skilled jobs that dustrial relations system because it is sim- the government has been unable to supply. pler, cheaper and easier for workers to ac- Employers in that industry offer a range of

CHAMBER 42 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 above-award incentives—including wage place the relatively user-friendly state indus- supplements, flexible start and finish times trial relations systems with a convoluted, and working from home arrangements—to complicated, adversarial federal system. It is attract staff to those jobs. And that is not un- because this government has, in nearly a usual; it happens in heaps of other industries. decade in office, harboured a long-held de- If employers want to offer Rolls Royce em- sire to wreck the Australian concept of a fair ployment conditions, the award system is not go at work. stopping them. Employers are already confused and wor- Then there is the furphy about simplicity. ried about what is coming. If that list of po- We are told the new legislation will stream- tential agencies and organisations that I re- line things for employers—but it will not. ferred to previously is not enough to make This legislation is bureaucracy gone mad. the average employer reach for their lawyer’s Under this legislation, Australian employers phone number, many employers will now will have to come to grips with a plethora of also have to grapple with new complications, regulatory and adjunct organisations. These including whether or not they are constitu- include: the Office of the Employment Ad- tional corporations. In this regard, I would vocate to ‘approve’—and I use that word like to bring to the attention of the Senate a loosely—agreements; the Australian Indus- matter brought to my attention by the Local trial Relations Commission to conciliate dis- Government Association of South Austra- putes, but, sadly, no longer to run test cases lia—an employer organisation representing that in the past have won family-friendly 68 councils that employ, collectively, more provisions such as maternity leave and re- than 8,000 South Australians. And, yes, dundancy pay for all Australian workers; the Senator Abetz, over on this side we do talk to Federal Court to interpret laws and undertake employer organisations as well as to unions, prosecutions; the Fair Pay Commission to churches and community groups. We are not make recommendations about minimum spooked by employer organisations—unlike wages and conditions; and the government, you, who are apparently spooked by trade which might or might not accept those rec- unions. ommendations. The Local Government Association of And the list goes on: there is also the Of- South Australia is an employer organisation fice of Workplace Services, the Department with extensive industrial experience and ex- of Employment and Workplace Relations, pertise. I know because, in my previous life the Building Industry Taskforce and alterna- as a trade union official, I came up against tive dispute resolution providers. And all of the considerable experience and expertise of that is because this government cannot bear the LGA on many occasions. On 22 Septem- the fact that the Australian Industrial Rela- ber 2005, the LGA wrote to the Minister for tions Commission is an independent organi- Employment and Workplace Relations, sation that operates as an umpire in the world Kevin Andrews, noting that under what was of work. It is because this government is ob- being proposed, and taking into account the sessed with smashing the trade union move- decisions of authorities such as the High ment. It is because this government wants to Court, it was likely that some of its mem- centralise control over Australia’s industrial bers—some of those 68 local authorities— system and give its minister the right to in- would be considered to be constitutional tervene in legitimate workplace bargaining. corporations and some would not. Within It is because this government wants to re- one industry, in one state, providing essen-

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 43 tially the same services to the community, Most of the organisations and individuals some employers would be under one award who made submissions to the very brief in- and some would not. Some employees would quiry that this government deigned to allow be on one set of conditions and some would know that this legislation is going to be bad be under a different system. Smaller coun- for families. For example, the Uniting cils, particularly in rural and regional com- Church of Australia, in its submission to the munities, would be dancing on the High Senate inquiry, said: Court tightrope trying to work out whether or We believe that the Government’s new minimum not they are constitutional corporations. conditions of employment are not adequate and It is not a scenario that members of the will not be effective in maintaining an appropriate Local Government Association of South standard of living for low-paid workers and their Australia want to see. Life is complicated families. Lowering the floor for working arrangements, failing to include greater protections enough in local government without this. and resources for workers on individual agree- Local council communities do not, I am sure, ments, and encouraging an approach wherein want to be forking out for High Court chal- personal litigation in the Federal Court is the only lenges. So how did the minister respond to means of redress for these workers will impact the LGA? In his letter to the LGA dated heavily on these vulnerable people. 28 October 2005, Minister Andrews said: ‘If And there was this contribution from the you have not already done so, you may wish Australian Catholic Commission for Em- to seek legal advice on the status of the local ployment Relations: councils you represent.’ How very helpful. The AFPCS— How very condescending. How useless an answer is that? How useless is it to tell a that is, the Australian fair pay and conditions peak employer body representing nearly 70 standard— employers, thousands of employees, and does not constitute a fair minimum standard for with lawyers on tap, ‘Go and get some legal the purpose of workplace negotiations. The depar- advice’? They have had the legal advice, and ture from the current safety net would expose many low paid and industrially weak employees the answer is: a legal minefield is in the off- to inequitable bargaining that will impact on their ing. What an arrogant, condescending re- terms and conditions of employment and, conse- sponse from the government to a worried quently, their ability to support ... their families. employer organisation. If the government members opposite will not That response is almost as condescending listen to the submissions from academics— as the comments that this legislation will be who they appear to despise and revile, if good for families, and that it will help people Senator Abetz’s comments during question balance their work and family responsibili- time are any guide—and union representa- ties. How can you possibly claim that a bill tives, you would have thought they might at that is intended to drive down wages is going least listen to the churches. But it appears the to be good for families? How can you say appeals of the churches to the government to that making it easier to sack people for no revisit this terrible legislation have also reason is good for families? How can you fallen on deaf ears. Certainly, Senator possibly say that working on a take-it-or- Santoro heard the churches: he told us all leave-it AWA with no penalty rates— about it yesterday. But apparently he did not regardless of whether you work weekends, like what he heard and so he discounted what weekdays or nights—is good for families? the churches said. That is typical of the arro-

CHAMBER 44 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 gance we see every day from this govern- their employees a decent wage? They will ment. not be able to compete and will be forced to Many people, including senators opposite, cut wages if their business is to survive. say that not all employers are going to line Welcome to the world of tipping. Wel- up to grab the chance that this legislation come to the American way where, yes, there gives them to drive down wages and condi- are plenty of jobs—it is just that not too tions. Of course that is true. I agree that most many of those jobs pay enough for people to employers respect and value their employees live a decent life on. Welcome to the world and attempt to reward them appropriately. of hospitality workers, hotel cleaning staff, But some employers do not treat their em- security staff, cab drivers and delivery driv- ployees fairly, and that is one of the reasons ers having to grovel for tips to survive. Wel- why we have laws in the first place: to pro- come to a world where the minimum rate of tect those who need protection. As has been pay does not move for years at a time. Wel- mentioned by my colleague Senator Wortley, come to Mr Howard’s arcane world of pov- the member for Kingston, in South Australia, erty and privilege. Welcome to the nightmare Mr Kym Richardson, has apparently ac- that this legislation will visit on Australia. knowledged that employers do not always Senator ADAMS (Western Australia) act appropriately, because he wants to set up (12.18 pm)—Firstly, I do not consider my- a hotline in his electorate office to take self or my colleagues doormats, as referred phone calls from workers fearful of being to by Senator McEwen. We are here to sup- exploited. I hope his staff are ready for it. No port legislation we believe in, legislation doubt they will be happy to work all of the which will give all Australians choice in their hours required, without penalty rates or many and varied workplaces. breaks, to answer the calls from Mr Richard- As a Western Australian farmer, I intend son’s constituents. I hope they work under to speak from a rural perspective in support the same conditions the people Mr Richard- of the Workplace Relations Amendment son purports to represent will have to work (Work Choices) Bill 2005. Virtually no sec- under when this legislation comes into place. tor in the Australian economy or community Heaven knows the current Workplace Re- has undergone more change in the last 30 lations Act is hardly a great piece of legisla- years than the agricultural and pastoral section. It is deficient in terms of protecting tors, and I would venture to say that no sec- workers in many respects. But this new raft tor of our community understands better than of legislation means that many otherwise the Australian farming community that Aus- good employers will be engaged in the race tralia now competes on a global basis for to the bottom. In competitive industries like export markets. For primary producers, the cleaning, hospitality, retail or transport what proposed industrial relations changes are an employer pays in wages vis-a-vis what both necessary and vital to the ongoing vi- their competitors pay can mean the differ- ability of Australia’s agricultural and pastoral ence between the survival and the demise of industries, and there is widespread support their business. I know that. When that new amongst industry bodies such as the National restaurant down the road opens up, with all Farmers Federation for the passing of the its staff on AWAs that have no penalty rates Work Choices bill. and pay only the minimum wage, what do There are several points which need to be you think is going to happen to the other res- understood in terms of how this legislation taurants on the strip that have tried to pay

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 45 may impact on the farming community. time gives WA farmers ample time to decide Firstly, approximately 90 per cent of farms on their best business option if the Western are either partnerships or sole trader entities, Australian state government maintains this which would not have access to the new sys- position—a position, I might add, that shows tem unless they became an incorporated en- just how much deference is paid to the tity. For such non-incorporated primary pro- wishes of the union movement by the Gallop ducers, the government has put in place a Labor government. That they are prepared to five-year transition period which will allow pander to the unions by retaining— each farmer ample time to understand the Senator George Campbell interjecting— implications of the legislation on his or her The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT individual business. During this time, they (Senator Chapman)—Senator Campbell, may decide that it is worth while to incorpo- you know that interjections are disorderly rate part of their business for the purpose of and contrary to the standing orders. employing people, by setting up a separate incorporated entity. I note that the National Senator ADAMS—an outmoded, clumsy Farmers Federation is recommending that conglomeration of state industrial relations farmers establish a company for employment laws rather than move ahead under one sim- purposes so that the remainder of the farming pler, fairer system beggars belief. Farmers in business may seek to maintain its tax bene- Western Australia will no doubt be hoping fits under the Farm Management Deposit that for once the WA state government will Scheme. put the farming community’s interests to the fore by referring its industrial relations pow- Ultimately, it will be up to each primary ers to the Commonwealth so that farmers can producer to make a decision about whether remain unincorporated and access the Work or not their business needs to become incor- Choices system. porated, either wholly or in part, to fully access the benefits of the new industrial rela- Any employment relationship should be tions system. The government will undertake based on trust, mutual respect, understand- a comprehensive educational process for the ing, flexibility and fairness. Wages and con- farming community during the five-year ditions should be negotiated and agreed to at transition period in order to ensure that all the enterprise level, taking into account the primary producers are fully aware of the im- unique circumstances of that business, be it a plications of the new system for their par- workshop, supermarket or farm. Fairness is ticular enterprise. Much also depends on best ensured by a system which is easily un- whether or not the state in which a farming derstood so that both employers and employ- entity operates refers its industrial relations ees know what they need to do. Rural Aus- powers to the Commonwealth. Victoria has tralians and the Australian economy have already gone down this path, so Victorian adapted well to workplace changes over the farmers will have access to the new indus- last two decades. Economic reform has pro- trial relations system as soon as it becomes duced benefits. The experience of the last 10 law, as will those in the ACT and the North- years is a testament to this. Since 1996, Aus- ern Territory. tralia has achieved 1.7 million new jobs, the lowest unemployment in almost 30 years, Western Australia, my home state, has and real wage growth of 14.9 per cent com- signalled that at this stage it is unwilling to pared to 1.2 per cent in 13 years of Labor. cede its industrial relations powers to the Commonwealth. The five-year transition

CHAMBER 46 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

According to the National Farmers Fed- treme, out of touch and arrogant government eration, many farmers are currently required that is growing even more so every day. It to work under two industrial instruments and fails to listen to its own constituency and they are paying high costs just to keep up even to its own coalition partners such as the with the compliance aspects of the current Nationals in Queensland, who also find this system. This in itself is not fair. However, the legislation intolerable. Howard government’s Work Choices bill Let us first consider what this bill is not offers a true choice to both employees and about. This bill is not about making the Aus- employers to attempt to solve this problem. tralian industrials relations system better or Employers and employees will be able to simpler, and anyone who thinks that it does remain under the award system if they has been taken in by the cheap rhetoric of choose to do so or if it is a less costly option this government. If the Howard government than moving to a new system—an important were genuine about industrial relations re- consideration for those farmers who employ form, it would have consulted with the state workers on an irregular basis where there is government representatives, small businesses no cost benefit to negotiating a workplace and unions to negotiate an outcome. We all agreement. This flexibility in workplace rela- know that the idea of a unitary system has tions will allow farmers in Australia to been around for a while. There are reports on choose a system that suits them—one where it, going back to Sweeney in 1975 and Han- they can minimise costs according to their cock in the eighties. But this government own unique set of circumstances. thinks it knows best, it seems. It does not. It The Pastoralists and Graziers Association should have taken a leaf out of those two of WA, who were debating the industrial re- major reports and developed a consultative lations reforms at the National Farmers Fed- model to do the same. eration Conference in Launceston yesterday, In the decent economic analysis that I have also indicated that they will support have seen, none of it—in fact, I have not reforms which encourage small business op- been able to find any—backs up the govern- erators to live and work in rural, regional and ment’s absurd claim that these changes will remote Australia. These small business peo- bring about an economic paradise with thou- ple need a simpler system of industrial regu- sands of jobs. I am happy to be corrected. If lation which makes it easier for them to em- you can find any such analysis, table it. ploy and retain people—a system that is easy There is no evidence to support it. Let me to understand and interpret, gives certainty to repeat that: none, zip, zero, nix, nought, all those party to agreements or contracts, is nothing. Instead, the government have cho- easy to administer and does not add unneces- sen to take the most extreme path possible sarily to the cost of doing business. I com- and they will try to smash the states, regard- mend the Workplace Relations Amendment less of cost or consequence. (Work Choices) Bill 2005 to the Senate. Christians have a great saying: as ye sow, Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (12.26 so shall ye reap. This government will reap pm)—I was caught unaware by the shortness the dividends of their extremist approach. If of the previous speech, but I appreciate that I the states will not be consulted now, they now get an opportunity to speak for longer. will do their consulting in the courts. The The Workplace Relations Amendment (Work results will be a series of court challenges Choices) Bill 2005 sums up what kind of a that could potentially last for years—perhaps government we have in power today: an ex-

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 47 until 2010 or 2011. The result will be the This bill is not about making life for Aus- states’ refusal to cooperate on non- tralians easier or better; this bill is about tak- incorporated businesses and on state public ing basic rights away from workers. This bill services. There will still be no achievement strikes at the very foundation of this country, of a unitary system. There will still be seven which is fairness, all because of one man’s industrial relations systems. The primary tired old dream—a dream for him but a liv- demand of business is certainty, yet what this ing nightmare that does not belong in the extremist bill delivers for business is five to 21st century and a dream that does not fit in six years of uncertainty—and that is just the with the challenges that Australia now faces. beginning of it. Some conservative commentators have Consider this: does anyone really believe pointed out that there has been a lot of hype that the Howard government—with their about the impact of this bill, and the gov- hopeless grab bag of ministerial incompe- ernment has been quick to mouth soothing tence, their internal factional strife that we words. I have heard these soothing words: saw played out so brutally and viciously in ‘Come into the warmth.’ It sounds to me the case of John Brogden, and their internal more like an invitation into a spider’s web. leadership strife between the death grip of While we are all enjoying the sunshine the Prime Minister and his wishy-washy, provided by 13 years of the Hawke-Keating will-he-won’t-he Treasurer—can stay the Labor government and the greatest economic course through the next election, let alone reforms ever undertaken in this country, let maintain the momentum to ensure that the us consider the future. Here is a fact: markets industrial relations system that they think fluctuate. To everyone paying off a mort- will work will actually work, or will they gage, to every parent, to every worker in a take their hand off the tiller and concentrate factory, in the fields, in the office, on the on their internal factional bickering and let it salesroom floor, on a boat or on a rig, to the slide? I take the latter as the likely outcome. timber workers and fishers, to the traders and And consider this: what will the Labor brokers, to the bartenders, dishwashers, government do with this nice little package cooks and cleaners, and to the call centre that the government has delivered for us? workers, let me put this question: how will Tear it up! That is what we will do. We are you go when times get tough under this gov- warning you now because we do not want to ernment’s industrial relations package? How be responsible for the years of industrial un- will your conditions last when it is time to certainty for business that you are creating renegotiate your contract and there are 10 with this divisive and extremist legislation. others after your job who are hungry for it, Senator Ian Campbell, I hope you are also hungry enough to take anything on offer to going to contribute to this debate. Let every get a foot in the door? How long will it take small business owner—because I know you before the employer comes to you with one have been a champion of those in the pass— hand clasped in the other and shoulders every franchisee, every self-employed person hunched over saying: ‘Look, the competitive and every entrepreneur know this: this ex- pressure’s getting to me. I have to drive your tremist Liberal government is foisting years conditions down to stay competitive, to stay of uncertainty on businesses throughout Aus- in business, but any job’s better than none’? tralia. That is one of the matters the employers will come to you with.

CHAMBER 48 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

It is a race to the bottom. Will employees The government deliberately kept the pub- lose their weekends? Will they be marked lic in the dark about details of the legislation. because they dare to complain about unpaid In fact, I would go as far as to say that this overtime? This legislation allows reasonable government misled the Australian public time to work but does it allow reasonable with its $55 million ad campaign, its gov- time to stay at home and have family time? ernment lies. The Australian community is Will it reasonably allow you to say no to an only just beginning to fully understand the employer and not face the sack if they have extreme nature of these changes. But worse fewer than 100 employees? Will it reasona- is still to come from this government, be- bly allow the employer to not indulge in in- cause if these irresponsible and unfair timidatory tactics? changes are passed through this place then Ever since this long-running debate on IR the public will really understand what rights began, Prime Minister Howard has repeat- they have lost—the rights that they deserve edly refused to guarantee that no individual to have in the workplace, the rights that Australian employee would be worse off Prime Minister Howard and his ideologically under his extreme industrial relations extreme Liberal government have taken changes. That is because he cannot. He away from them. Back in 1996, the Prime knows the truth, as does every member of the Minister gave what he described as an iron- Liberal Party and the coalition in this coun- clad, rock solid guarantee that no individual try. That is why he is spending taxpayers’ Australian employee would be worse off. He money like a drunken sailor, throwing it at will not give it now. But I could encourage any TV station, radio station or newspaper those on the government side in their that will run an ad—$55 million worth of it, speeches to give it. The Prime Minister will and I suspect more to come. There is an old not give that guarantee because he knows saying that the bigger the lie and the more that the public policy objective of these pro- often you repeat it, the more people will be- posals is to reduce wages and reduce or re- lieve it. move conditions and entitlements. There is something in our national charac- Let us be clear: IR reform in itself is not ter that makes us baulk at extremism. We do bad. But I do not call this IR reform. It is not like it and we are not comfortable with it, changes to the industrial relations system and most of us feel a sense of great unease that we have known. Labor cannot support whenever we hear extremist politics being this extreme model because it is a clear at- bandied about. Yet the Howard government tack on workers’ wages. On wages, the has become deaf to the concerns of ordinary Prime Minister says: ‘My guarantee is my Australians. The Prime Minister has isolated record. Look at my record.’ The Prime Min- himself in the ivory towers of big business, ister says that, under his record, real wages the corporate box and the first-class flights to have increased by 14 per cent and the mini- Rome, and let us not forget the $40,000-per- mum wage has increased by 12 per cent in night hotel room. He is probably on his vic- real terms. But let us look at the Prime Min- tory lap with Mrs Howard, sipping cham- ister’s record. It is a record of failure, a re- pagne and making toasts with foreign digni- cord of selling out workers. Why? Because taries and diplomats before retiring. Doesn’t the labour movement through the ACTU has he look happy for it? He is happy to push delivered the increases while the Howard through this extremist legislation because he Government has opposed every single mini- no longer listens to Australians. mum wage case. The minimum wage has

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 49 increased by 12 per cent in real terms despite this being termed duress under the legisla- the Prime Minister’s best efforts, not because tion. You have actually got to say it is not of them. If the Australian Industrial Relations duress under the legislation to give it effect Commission had agreed to the submissions because that might be what it actually does. made by the government since it came to The committee was told by DEWR that sec- office and made its first submission to the tion 104(6) was ambiguous in this respect. AIRC on a minimum wage case in 1997, An example recently referred to in question those on the minimum wage would be $50 a time in federal parliament relates to an AWA week, or $2,600 a year, worse off. That which states: would have been the consequence of the Wages: Your rate of pay which is inclusive of Howard government’s extremist submissions leave loading, all allowances, penalties and public to the Australian Industrial Relations Com- holiday pay is $17.20 per hour. mission. That is all it takes to knock off the default That is why the Prime Minister wants to clause. take an axe to the minimum wage and re- The government is also seeking to do move the powers of the Industrial Relations away completely with unfair dismissal pro- Commission. He wants to get through the tection for many millions of workers. They back door what he has not been able to get will lose their protections. Where we can through the front door. He has opposed the decide and decipher, those businesses with minimum wage increases so he wants to cre- 100 or fewer employees will have no protec- ate an unfair pay commission. Yet you come tion, other than the statutory law protection, to entitlements and the great con continues. which is not about the unfair dismissals that The Prime Minister is saying that they are the employees want to progress. They want only knocking off four allowable matters— the ability to be able to use the commission long service leave, jury service, notice of as it has always been used—to help workers termination and superannuation—because and employers. It creates a forum for them to those matters can be dealt with in the state discuss the issues that beset them. system. Now the Prime Minister and his ministry At the same time, he is proclaiming how of cronies would have us believe that unlaw- wonderful it is that the government is pre- ful termination laws will protect employees serving four legislated minimum conditions. from being unfairly sacked, but unlawful Of course, if you include the minimum wage, termination is not the same as unfair dis- that is five. They will be leaving 12 others missal. Unlawful termination laws are very floating. Public holidays, rest breaks, bo- narrow and apply in very few circumstances. nuses, annual leave loadings, penalty rates The government’s proposed unlawful termi- and shift and overtime loadings are among nation laws will not cover most circum- those that can be written off by a single line stances in which employees are unfairly in an AWA. Shame on this government. dismissed. In fact, despite the rhetoric of a The report by the Employment, Workplace fair bargain between an employer and an Relations and Education Legislation Com- employee, the government has already mittee into this bill found that the drafting of rigged the bargaining process to advantage section 104(6) enables an employer to re- the employer before they even sit down at quire new and existing employees to make the table. an AWA a condition of employment without

CHAMBER 50 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

The proposed legislation will make it an Already we are seeing cases which illus- offence punishable with a $33,000 fine to trate that the Howard government’s pledge even suggest that certain provisions—such as that workers will have choice is a furphy. unfair dismissal—be included in the agree- When it comes to the crunch, workers will ment. If a union official or an average em- have to fight and fight hard for their rights to ployee—or even a not so average em- be taken seriously by employers, and they ployee—has the temerity to say that they will need strong unions behind them to help want certain protections outlined in their with the fight. In fact, there is only one agreement then they are $33,000 out of choice that Mr Howard wants for workers— pocket if the government decides to single the choice to sign up to a non-union agree- them out. The government, despite its rheto- ment or face termination. The government ric of choice, has taken certain provisions off does not want workers to have a choice. One the bargaining table completely. There is no of the choices of a certified agreement is for choice. a greenfield business to have a bargain with The opposition believes that workplace itself and come up with a term and a certified collective bargaining should be promoted agreement that will be presented to its work- and underpinned by a safety net of fair and ers when they turn up. That is not a contract; relevant minimum standards of pay and em- that is not a wages for work bargain. That is ployment conditions. As included in the a disgrace. The government does not want committee’s report, a legislative framework workers to have a choice at all. It wants for agreement making should ensure fair- workers to leave unions—it is driving them ness, flexibility and job security; provide an way—it wants workers to be forced to sign arbitral role for the Industrial Relations up to non-union agreements, and it wants to Commission to ensure that parties to a dis- cut penalty rates and entitlements and drive pute enter negotiations in a reasonable and those conditions down. proper way; and require employers and em- This is the future of the Australian work- ployees to bargain in good faith. The Work place system. The big end of town tells the Choices bill does not meet any of these basic workers what they will work for, and every- requirements. one else has to be quiet. Everything about There are pressures, but these pressures this situation underscores why the workplace are occurring where we have skills shortages relations changes are bad for Australia, bad in the labour market. What has the govern- for workers and bad for the unions that rep- ment done about that? The government has resent them. It is no wonder that Mr Howard left us unprepared for the demands we now has consistently refused to guarantee that no face, and the way to invest in the future is worker will be worse off under the new leg- not to whack workers with wage decreases or islation. This extremist government simply to take away their long service leave, their does not believe in a fair go for ordinary penalty rates and their right to take the day Australians who happen to belong to a union off on public holidays. The way to invest in or who happen to want to collectively bar- the future of the Australian economy and gain for a better deal. Australian workers is to invest in their skills, If you have time, come to my office and I training and education. That is the right will tell you about some of those employers course, but it is not the course this govern- and how they bargained unfairly. Under Mr ment wants to take. Howard’s extremist new laws, I suspect that they will be able to do it even better. They

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 51 will want to sign up people for an AWA on a flak. It comes with the territory when you are take it or leave it basis: ‘If you want to earn in politics. But I do mind when the flak is enough to feed your family and pay your undeserved or when it is not objective and is mortgage, sorry, that is all I can afford as an designed to bolster the view that the ABC is employer and all I am going to offer as an somehow untouchable. No entity that de- employer.’ The right to collectively bargain pends on public funds is untouchable. No is of paramount importance. It should not be media operation of whatever stripe or prove- lost in this way. It should not be forgotten. nance is untouchable either. It is the media’s Debate interrupted. job to critique governments—we all accept that and welcome it—and to watch over and MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST report on community issues. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT The ABC does a fine job in that role as (Senator Marshall)—Order! It being 12.45 our leading public broadcaster. I have always pm, I call on matters of public interest. made that point too. But it makes mistakes. Australian Broadcasting Corporation Everyone does and, as I said, nobody is per- Senator SANTORO (Queensland) (12.45 fect. It must, and I underline ‘must’, work pm)—Last time I spoke in the matters of out a way to correct itself in its partiality. It public interest discussion, on 9 November, I does itself the greatest disservice by evading spoke on the continuing issue of ABC bias issues and avoiding answers, and that is a and lack of balance of broadcast news and shame. Its chief problem remains the coterie current affairs. It was no particular pleasure of luminaries in its news and current affairs doing so. I would far rather that, in the con- broadcasting who consistently, wilfully fail text of obvious error, the ABC just accepted to abide by the ABC’s own rules requiring that it is an imperfect entity—nothing and objectivity and balance. Until it is prepared no-one is perfect—and answered questions to confront that issue in a meaningful way, as it should do rather than evade them, which voices in the community and in this parlia- it always does. ment will be very loud on that significant It is with equal displeasure that I return to failure of management. the topic today. I do so on this occasion for At the latest estimates, as honourable two chief reasons. One is that I wish to make senators know, I asked a lot of questions. I a plea directly to the ABC’s managing direc- had hoped to re-engage Mr Balding in that tor, Mr Russell Balding, to get control of the process, but for reasons that remain still un- nest of obfuscators in his corporation. Mr explained that was not to be. I put a lot more Balding did not appear at the latest estimates questions on notice. The result was a further hearings, of course, as everyone knows, but flurry of activity by ABC defenders, who, he is still the man in charge. Presumably if while they might approach the issues from he was to say to his people, ‘Look, just an- different perspectives, are seemingly of one swer the questions,’ his people would com- mind that the ABC is above criticism from a ply with his direction. government senator. One particularly perni- After the last estimates hearings, at which cious group of defenders exists within the the ABC’s crack platoon of obfuscators ap- organisation known as the Friends of the peared—dimly, as it were, through the ABC. I do not believe they are true friends of smokescreen—in Mr Balding’s place, I the ABC at all. True friends point out faults. copped a lot of flak. I do not mind copping They do not ignore them, seek to hide them or aid and abet hiding them.

CHAMBER 52 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Honourable senators may know that I had Trevor, for the record, I pulled the poll on a straw poll running on my web site on the 9 November, but not because the ABC was question of whether there was a left-wing winning. I pulled it because it was absolutely bias within the ABC. It was not a scientific clear that it was rorted by people running a poll. It could not be, and I do not think that vote stuffing campaign. Nizza in Sydney’s anyone would ever think that it could be, but eastern suburbs said to Trevor in the ACT in it provided a way for people to express a an email sent at 3.32 pm on Thursday point of view on the ABC. After the latest 10 November: estimates it was rorted by the Friends of the Yes, he’s removed the vote from his Home Page. I ABC. I refer to the organisation that arro- think when it started looking good for the ABC gates to itself that title. Some of the email and bad for him, he decided to stop the Poll. traffic that I tracked down relating to this She got it absolutely wrong. Trevor emailed operation was quite interesting. The vote Nizza at 11.49 am on Wednesday 9 Novem- stuffing that these people engaged in appears ber and said: to have been organised from within the New It’s now 55 %—but I can’t figure out how to South Wales wing of ‘the friends’. The email vote. Perhaps that survey has closed! traffic identified indicates that the Friends of It was just a little too late to take part in the the ABC staged an orchestrated campaign to sport. Bad luck, Trevor—try running onto rig the poll. An examination of the web site’s the field a little earlier next time. server logs support this claim, as do comments posted on a number of left-wing blog On the subject of opinion polls, I was in- sites. terested to see yesterday the results of a Roy Morgan poll on broadcasting consumer hab- It is also interesting that in one case one its. It shows that Australians who support the individual voted 1,900 times. That is real Australian Labor Party predominantly turn to dedication. Dozens of IPs identified by track- the ABC for their current affairs while sup- ing post on my web site—Santosantoro.com porters of the coalition opt for Channel 9. I is a great site, by the way; please feel free as certainly hope that this does not mean that parliamentary colleagues to visit it often and the ABC will now lay claim to another col- recommend it to your friends—also appeared lection of undeserved brownie points on the to have voted dozens of times. The orches- basis that it is plainly giving its audience trated stuffing of votes by the Friends of the what it wants to hear and see. ABC is of no consequence except that it seems to indicate a very curious view of the For the benefit of people who apparently fundamental principles of democracy. misinterpret my motives in trying to call the ABC to account, including the Friends of the Perhaps the friends are inflicted with the ABC—the Queensland chapter of which I same hubris that leads some of the ABC’s am still trying to join, by the way—various great minds to believe that only they possess media critics who have the chutzpah required true wisdom. In any event, I say to them to- to call me a nitpicker while still finding it day, and particularly to Nizza Siano of the possible to look at themselves straight-faced eastern suburbs Friends of the ABC in Syd- in the mirror and of course the chatterati ney and Trevor Wheeler of the ACT branch: within the ABC itself, I again say: I am not don’t kid yourselves. There is a bit more seeking to replace left-wing imbalance with substance to these ABC issues than can be an alternative right-wing imbalance. No-one fixed from their point of view by rorting a I know wants to do that. It would be wrong web poll and laughing about it. Nizza and

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 53 to attempt to do so and against the public Carlton. It must not concur with his view of interest. However, it is the public interest how the universe truly works. Well, to that, I that I seek to serve. That is why commenta- say: tough. tors like Mike Carlton of the Sydney Morn- Other pundits had a go at me following ing Herald are so wrong when they misinter- the estimates hearings and that is fine. As I pret the motives of those like me who seek said earlier, it comes with the territory. Some an ABC that is actually accountable, as op- of them were even funny, and I think, in this posed to being theoretically accountable. On instance, of Matt Price of the Australian, for Saturday 5 November Mr Carlton wrote in example. And some of them are earnest like his column: Errol Simper, who writes the excellent Santoro’s idee fixe, amounting almost to mania, is ‘Scribes’ column, also in the Australian. I that the ABC is a nest of left-wing traitors to be was interested to read later, by the way, that exposed relentlessly. He retains a network of Mr Price now thinks that I may have a point busybodies who diligently report evidence of bias about bias in the ABC since he discovered to and subversion. his horror that his own favourite music is not ‘There are about 28 people in Australia moni- favoured by the ABC. toring what the ABC does,’ he boasted to a Senate estimates committee on Monday. ‘I receive be- Jokes aside, the issue of ABC bias and tween 15 and 20 tapes a week, and out of that we lack of balance in news and current affairs get transcripts. We are absolutely deadly serious broadcasting is simply not going to go away. ... about making the ABC accountable.’ It is on the agenda. It will stay there until the Mr Carlton got it wrong. I doubt that anyone issue is resolved. What must be delivered is is surprised by that. I do not retain and have objectivity in line with the ABC’s charter as never said I retain a network of people, a public broadcaster, and a lasso must be busybodies or otherwise, to file reports on placed around the broadcast egoists who ABC bias. Mr Carlton apparently needed a pitch their own agenda. That this campaign is dyspeptic column item. Perhaps he was hav- on some occasions supported by unbelieva- ing a bad day. Maybe someone’s latte had bly crass quips on air is the plainest evidence got cold or their chardonnay had unac- of all that these people think they are a law countably warmed beyond the exact Celsius unto themselves. One thinks of Tony Eas- value at which it should be served. Life is so tley’s moving car quip on AM about Vivian difficult sometimes, isn’t it? While he was Solon as a prime example of a public sin left pondering the technical difficulties of reheat- publicly unpunished—one suspects it is qui- ing latte or recooling an uncorked chardon- etly applauded by the in-crowd. nay, he invented something to write about Of course, broadcasters of whatever class, using the tried and true methodology of some luminary or otherwise, are quite at liberty to of his ilk. He started with a basic misinter- delude themselves over the nature and effect pretation and extrapolated it from there. of the threat that faces democratic systems The fact is there are many people in the from the terrorists of this world. But Austra- community who object to bias and lack of lians do not believe they are entitled to mar- balance on the public airwaves. The fact is ket that delusion by attempting to influence there are some among them who actually audiences to their way of thinking or, for that want to do something about it, and from matter, any particular way of thinking. That among that cohort some of them come to me. is the bottom line. As I mentioned at the be- This is obviously something that disturbs Mr ginning of this speech, it would have been

CHAMBER 54 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 useful to take it up again with Mr Balding at We all know that the human services sec- the latest hearings. tor is epitomised by low pay levels, particu- For those who still refuse to comprehend, larly in aged care and in disability services. I repeat: the issue of ABC bias is not a politi- Employment in the aged care sector, both cal argument. That may be something the community care and residential aged care, Friends of the ABC and some within the often means difficult working hours, includ- ABC itself find difficult to believe, but it is ing broken shifts, antisocial hours—for ex- nonetheless the truth. And it is what has ample, night shift—and the regularly re- driven my campaign to correct bias and lack ported need to work unpaid, both overtime of balance in ABC news and current affairs and through meal breaks. Some of this is broadcasting since I first entered the Senate related to the nature of the caring role, but it in 2002. The situation is that the ABC’s own is also due in general to underfunding of the rules are being flouted. We cannot forget human services sector. This legislation, the about the smokescreen of contextual so-called Work Choices bill, will only exac- counterargument that the pliant ABC man- erbate an already stressed system. Carers agement fronts up with when these issues are who are able to work have to balance their raised, so that the broadcasters themselves caring and work needs and will also face become the arbiters. Legitimate public dis- uncertain times with the introduction of this cussion about policy and outcomes is de- draconian legislation. railed as a consequence. This can be cor- In the dissenting report on workplace rected by the ABC management, and I agreements Senator Troeth demonstrated a strongly recommend that they must get on rare moment of frankness about the true in- and do so. The ABC has thus far ducked tent of this bill when she wrote: every substantial question about editorial Government party Senators take the view here bias. That reflects no credit on the corpora- that safety-net awards are probably too high ... tion and indeed it is a shame. and that this causes serious distortion in the wage Workplace Relations structure, leading to discouragement of employment. Senator McLUCAS (Queensland) (12.56 What she means is that this bill is about cut- pm)—Most people understand the word ting wages. And that means cutting wages of ‘choice’ to mean that there are a range of already lowly paid but highly valuable em- options, but in the so-called Work Choices ployees in aged care. It means cutting the bill the word is an abomination. The reality wages of those people with disabilities who is that people will have no choice but to take work and the wages of carers, and it means jobs that offer lower relative pay, poorer being able to sack people at will—stripping conditions; a lack of job security and no already limited power from the employee compensation for unsocial or extended work- and giving all the power to the employer. ing time. The impact of these changes on people working in aged care, for people with We should have a look at what this means disabilities, for people who work with those for personal care workers working in aged with disabilities and for carers will undoubt- care, who are among one of the lowest paid edly be devastating not only for the workers groups of employees in Australia. These themselves but also for the sectors in which workers are almost universally reliant on the they work. minimum award wage. Many aged care workers are lowly paid and vulnerable. Their vulnerability is related to the caring role.

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 55

Many aged care services employ small, co- her family needs, so she works shifts that are operative working teams who are intimately unsociable and that appropriately carry pen- and personally involved in the lives of the alty rates. Then she can add about $140 to people they care for and with each other. I her weekly pay. Even then, that is not big often receive reports of nurses and personal money, but those important penalty rates will care workers who agree not to take wage be threatened by the introduction of this rises due to them because the facility owner Work Choices bill. Without those penalty tells them that they cannot afford to pay rates, Susan would find it difficult to pay her them. This is an appalling situation—that the mortgage and to look after the needs of her care of elderly Australians is reliant on the children, and potentially would have to go goodwill of staff in a facility forgoing enti- without herself. tlements they are due and pay that they de- Hundreds of thousands of health workers serve. That is the situation now. rely on their allowances, loadings and pen- What will happen when employers take alty rates to give them a decent income and advantage of the new workplaces legislation compensate them for working around the to further strip away already limited entitle- clock in a high stress environment. The im- ments that workers’ representatives have pact of these changes in the health sector in gained for them? They do not have strong my view could be quite dramatic. Thousands individual bargaining positions, and could of people working in aged care rely on the easily be targeted by an employer who is minimum wage case run before the Industrial either strapped for cash to run a facility or Relations Commission each year for their prepared to exploit their workers. annual pay rise. The switch to the dishon- Let us take the case of Susan. Susan is a estly named Fair Pay Commission puts fu- 45-year-old divorcee with two teenaged chil- ture pay rises in jeopardy. dren who works as a personal care worker in The Australian Nursing Federation, which an aged care facility. She loves her work, represents 145,000 nurses, has condemned where she helps look after 79 elderly resi- the bill, saying it will have a negative impact dents, 42 of whom have high care needs be- on the working lives of registered and en- cause of dementia. Her day involves helping rolled nurses and their capacity to provide the residents with their care needs, such as quality nursing care. Many hard fought assisting them in getting out of bed, shower- working conditions that protect residents and ing, dressing and helping them with their promote quality care—such as minimum meals, and much more. She knows each per- breaks between shifts and measures to man- son and their family, and in her own way is a age excessive workloads—could be lost. strong source of care and comfort to them These conditions are currently described in all. Because of the high care needs of her awards and agreements and could very well residents and because of her strong commit- go with the introduction of individual ment to those she cares for, Susan is very agreements. With the current nurse shortage busy all day and often works through meal crisis, this bill will have massive recruitment breaks and stays late if there is work to fin- and retention issues associated with it. Why ish, and the residents in turn love her for it. would a nurse or a carer work night duty or For all of this, Susan would take home weekends in aged care if they get no more $440 for a regular 38-hour week, working money than working a weekday shift? day shifts. But that is not enough to sustain

CHAMBER 56 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Recruitment and retention of personal care of being taken advantage of due to the nature workers and nurses in aged care is well of the caring role, the small work places that known as an existing problem in the sector. they work in and their commitment to the How can we solve the staffing crisis in aged people they work with and care for. The sec- care when workers, who are already lowly tor reports high staff turnover related to the paid, are forced onto minimum conditions, low levels of pay, the demanding job and get no penalty rates for weekend or night burnout. The government’s workplace rela- shifts and can be sacked at the drop of a hat? tions bill will only exacerbate this already If this government were really serious about tenuous situation. the provision of quality care for older people, I turn now to people with disabilities. Pro- care that is provided by appropriately skilled fessor Ron McCallum, professor of industrial staff, then they would have a commitment to law at Sydney University, recently said that seriously improving the working conditions the rights of people with disabilities could of these workers, rather than be stripping well be undermined by the bill because of conditions away. In too many facilities, resi- the provisions allowing them to be paid well dents and staff are both suffering because below the minimum wage. The so-called Fair there are simply not enough staff, nor the Pay Commission will be handed broad pow- resources required, to deliver proper care. ers in setting minimum pay rates for all Stress levels are rising and residents are be- workers, including those with disabilities. ing forced to go without the most basic care, Professor McCallum said the law already such as something as simple as being taken allowed employers to pay below minimum to the toilet on time. Elderly Australians de- rates for people working in business services, serve better and so do the staff working in but said the new provisions were overly the sector. broad without safeguards. He added that The removal of access to unfair dismissal there was a risk of employers using special protections in workplaces of less than 100 rates to buy cheap labour from people with employees is another change that will have disabilities. In addition, the Australian Fed- implications for nurses and other aged care eration of Disability Organisations said the workers. The legislation allows employers in main concerns that they had about the bill workplaces of less than 100 employees to included: the potential for a reduction in sack an employee for any reason—or for no earnings for people with disability, the ade- reason at all—without redress. Most aged quacy of protections for people with disabil- care facilities meet this condition, which will ity with regard to negotiations and employ- jeopardise the job security of their staff. ment tenure, and the impact of the reduction Community care workers are another work- in minimum working conditions. force that will be dramatically affected by Proposed section 7J(110) of the bill details this bill. Community care is not only less the wage setting parameters of the Australian regulated than residential aged care, but the Fair Pay Commission and lists the factors workers work in isolated situations. They which the Commission is to regard when also are employed in small work teams and setting wages. The last of these is: this will make them even more susceptible to ... providing minimum wages for ... employees attacks on their employment conditions. with disabilities that ensure those employees are Like the people who work in the aged care competitive in the labour market. sector, people who work in the disability sector are relatively low paid and are at risk

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 57

Unsurprisingly, people with disabilities are to their personal circumstances. Carers strug- concerned about what competitive means. In gle to be part of the work force. This legisla- the bill, employees with disabilities are de- tion could very well limit participation for fined as people who are eligible for the Dis- people who are balancing work and care. The ability Support Pension. However, AFDO is loss of employment for a working carer is of the view that proposed section 7J(110) of debilitating, not only because of the loss of the bill reads as if all employees with dis- income but also, very importantly, because abilities will be subject to an alternative of the loss of connection to community. wages setting mechanism. The Australian Australians have conclusively demon- Federation of Disability Organisations also strated that they do not want these laws. pointed out that people with disabilities al- They want laws that are fair to both em- ready earn less than their able-bodied coun- ployee and employer. They want laws that terparts due in part to stereotyping and dis- enable their children to grow up in a society crimination. There is no reason to believe that is fair for them and for all Australians. that discriminatory attitudes will not colour The Work Choices bill is not in the interests the judgment of people who are charged with of workers in aged care, people with disabili- negotiating the wages of employees with a ties or carers. We need to improve the rights disability and lead to people with a disability of vulnerable workers—whether they are in being offered lower wages for doing the aged care, people with disabilities or car- same work as others. ers—not increase their vulnerability. But this In the remaining time I would like to is what the Work Choices bill will do. How quickly go to the question of the impact of did our society come to this—that we are this bill on carers, who also will be affected treating our citizens with such disregard and by the implementation of the so-called Work expect them to just sit back quietly and be Choices bill. All working carers struggle to grateful for this Hobson’s choice? These juggle their care and work responsibilities. privileged government ministers have no They are most likely to be in low paid em- idea what it means to be working and barely ployment. The Access Economics report, The scraping by just to put food on the table. economic value of informal care, identifies They do not know what it is like to worry that: about the next rent or mortgage payment, or Carers typically live in households with lower whether they are even going to have a job than average measured income, being over- tomorrow. The public do not want this bill; represented in the lower quintiles and under- there is no justification for it and Australian represented in the higher quintiles. society will suffer as a consequence. Also, their care responsibilities impinge on Gynaecological Cancer their work commitments. They are predicta- Senator ALLISON (Victoria—Leader of bly unable to take variable shifts. They need the Australian Democrats) (1.11 pm)—Over predictability in their working times and in the past five years, 7,395 Australian women their income. The loss of bargaining power have died from a gynaecological cancer—55 for people who are reliant on steady income, per cent of those from ovarian cancer. What I places these individuals in a tenuous posi- want to talk about today is the fact that it is a tion. Working carers have limited bargaining hidden disease. There are no known effective power. There will be many who will lack the methods for early diagnosis of ovarian can- effective capacity to refuse terms—both pay cer, no Australian guidelines and no referral and working hours—which are unacceptable

CHAMBER 58 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 policies. The Australian government’s report, for support for cancer patients—improving Priorities for action in cancer control 2001- psychosocial care for people with cancer 2003, indicated that although cancer con- through the provision of psychologists in sumes six per cent of overall direct govern- cancer centres and clinics. This is ideal but ment expenditure on health—$1.9 billion resources have not been allocated across all according to the Australian Institute of centres and few women have access to such Health and Welfare—gynaecological cancer support. needs were grossly underrepresented as a In Australia, 1,151 new cases of ovarian priority. cancer were diagnosed in 1997. Survival The priorities for action addressed seven from these cancers is considered lower than of the eight national health priority areas but world benchmark figures—in fact, 20 per did not adequately recognise gynaecological cent lower than that achieved by the United cancer needs. The gynaecological cancer States. So it must be said that the national priorities emphasised cervical cancer but, health programs fail to give the best care. rather than introduce new initiatives to allay The outcome for ovarian cancer survival is women’s risk, it was recommended that there recognised as poor. Forty per cent survive be a reduction in pap screening intervals five years from diagnosis because diagnosis, from two to three years. The Priorities for as I said, occurs at such a late stage. In Sep- action in cancer control paper admits that tember 2001, the government announced the this reduction will: establishment of a new program for ovarian ... yield substantial cost savings but might entail a cancer and provided $500,000 over two small increase in the burden of cervical cancer. years, and the National Breast Cancer Centre Under ‘prevention’, there is no mention of was asked to implement the program. But gynaecological cancer. The priorities for ac- $250,000 a year is not going to fund research tion include improving outcomes from ovar- into an early screening test for ovarian can- ian cancer by ensuring that all people with cer. In February 2002, as part of the National these cancers are assessed at a multidiscipli- Ovarian Cancer Week activities, the Ovarian nary specialist centre as soon as possible Cancer Program published a new report, after diagnosis. The problem is that the data Ovarian cancer in Australian women. This shows that, of all GP referrals between 2002 report highlights the need to take immediate and 2004, only 0.5 to one per cent were reaction on ovarian cancer. ferrals to gynaecological specialists, despite Of the 350,000 Australians diagnosed the number of women across Australia diag- every year with cancer, 34,000 will die from nosed with a gynaecological cancer per it—that is all cancers. Female cancers are year—3,881 new cases in 2001. projected to increase by 29 per cent from It is not possible for many women in 40,518 cases in 2001 to 52,356 cases by country areas and, indeed, in cities to get 2011, yet spending on cancer does not reflect access to specialist centres.G Ovarian cancer this projection. On average $146 is spent for is often misdiagnosed until it is at an ad- every man and $135 for every woman with vanced stage, so it is urgent that there be im- cancer, and the older the age group, the proved education for GPs, nurses, gynae- greater the difference. By 65 to 74 years of cologists and surgeons, and that women do age the gap is $452 per person. By age 75 get access to these multidisciplinary special- and over, the expenditure gap is $500. So ist centres. The priorities identify the need there are very big differences in the way that

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 59 the health system is treating people with can- breaking. Even though I was in the same position cer on a gender basis. I struggled to find the words to comfort them. I want to now read the story of a young But I am devastated by the attitude of the health mother who currently has stage 4 vaginal industry and general media by their reinforcement cancer and was given six months to live that women should be embarrassed or ashamed of Pap Smears and intimate discussions about the some time ago. It is a very moving letter. I essence of their femininity. will not go through all the details of her diagnosis, but I do want to read the last part of Why are the words vagina, vulva and clitoris so shameful? her letter. She says: These anatomical parts are what set the female Of course I have questioned WHY???? I have race apart from the male population. Men can sought second, third and even a sixth opinion of discuss their penises in public but women are my diagnosis only to be instructed to enjoy the raised to believe that their differences are dirty or time I have left. You would think that after that to be kept private. It raises the age old debate brief explanation of my situation I would be more about how men are the superior race and yet upset with the medical professionals who have without women and their reproductive organs the poked, prodded, biopsied, and baffled me with population would not exist. their foreign language of medical terminology. I may not have much time left to fight this battle But my anger is also directed at the general pub- but whilst I am still able I will be taking my story lic. The friends, family and community members to as many people as will listen. I will stand who have made me feel ashamed of my diagno- alongside women like Kathleen Mazzella and sis. I have encountered people who ask about the GAIN Gynaecological Awareness Information location of my cancer and then look at me with Network ... in the hope that more women can find horror when I tell them. the confidence to speak out about these truly im- I had begun explaining my diagnosis by telling portant feminine issues. people all the secondary locations the cancer had Due to the rather extreme nature of my situation I invaded and excluding the primary cancer, but I have had many people ask what they can do to soon realized I shouldn’t have to be responsible help....I could be selfish and materialistic and ask for the discomfort of other people, the fact re- for financial contributions which would certainly mained the secondary sites were a direct result of ease a lot of pressure on my grieving family, I Vaginal cancer. could request an all expenses paid holiday or I Even though cancer is no longer a health issue could mention a new car which is sorely needed discussed only behind closed doors, people still but all I ask is this.... do not completely understand that it isn’t conta- I want more women to come forward with their gious. I have had friends sever contact with me opinions and to take a stand against the general for reasons I still cannot understand. Some friends consensus that we cannot or should not discuss believed that by entering my home they would get our sexual health or genitalia with the same ac- cancer, others stopped contact because they didn’t ceptance that men can and do. know how to deal with my diagnosis. As a woman I believe I know my own body better The second category I understand to a degree but than any doctor or any man. If your intuition tells the first made me angry. At first I thought maybe you something is wrong then don’t be discour- they were uneducated but my experience of these aged from fighting for the truth. Keep battling the people told me it wasn’t their education that was social intolerance and tear down the stigma relat- lacking but more the societal awareness of cancer. ing to women and their bits. During my courses of radiation and chemotherapy So many issues may have contributed to having I met some amazing people of all ages. They in- this alien destroying my body but if someone had spired me as much as their stories were heart- told me there were risks associated with multiple

CHAMBER 60 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 surgeries or explored in more detail the reason for and what is being called for. As I said, this my miscarriages I may still have a future that does not mean an inquiry. I do not wish to extends beyond six months. overload the committee with tasks, but I do I pray that even if only one woman takes my story think that there are opportunities for our seriously she will have the power to save her own committees to look at the pleas which are life. made of us and see whether there is a need or This afternoon I plan to table a petition a desire amongst the committee for a further which has now collected almost 3,000 signa- investigation. I think this important issue for tures from women who believe that this is a women needs to have that treatment and I subject that ought to be paid much more at- look forward to support on this in the Senate tention to. That petition will say: chamber this afternoon when I do that. We believe that Australian females should have Communications the basic rights to increased funding for the man- Senator CONROY (Victoria) (1.23 agement and prevention of gynaecological cancers and sexually transmitted infections and sex- pm)—I rise today to discuss a matter of pub- ual functioning, especially in relation to research lic interest—the ongoing shambles that is the funding allocation of basic services and treatment communications portfolio in this government and increased education and community aware- because of the refusal of the Minister for ness. Communications, Information Technology That petition, as I said, is signed by almost and the Arts to make the tough policy deci- 3,000 women. I am going to take the unusual sions required across her portfolio. While the step this afternoon of asking the Senate, on policy inactivity of the terminally cynical behalf of some other colleagues in this place Senator Alston and barely interested Daryl who have agreed to be a part of this, that this Williams are well-known, Senator Coonan’s be tabled not in the normal way by handing it lack of action has been disguised by a series to the Clerk but by handing it over as part of of public statements feigning policy action. my notice of motion, and I ask that it be re- However, when you scratch the surface of ferred to the Senate Community Affairs minister’s public comments, it is clear that Committee. the minister has produced just as little in the way of substantive reform as Messrs Alston It strikes me that in this place petitions of- and Williams. ten go nowhere or appear to go nowhere and those people who have spent a lot of time It is hard to believe that the Department of collecting signatures and lodging them in the Communications, Information Technology Senate or the House of Representatives often and the Arts web site currently lists 26 re- feel that their efforts are in vain. There is views as being open for consultation. That is some small mention in the Hansard but little a review for every fortnight of the last year. else besides. In other parliaments it is an A Parlinfo search for the words ‘Coonan’ and automatic response for a petition to be re- ‘review’ returns 588 media reports this year. ferred to the appropriate committee. That There has been plenty of reviewing going on does not mean that it is referred for an in- in the minister’s office—just not much deci- quiry. It means that it is referred for the sion making. On the big issues in communi- committee to consider and make a response. cations like cross-media reform, digital tele- That is exactly what I plan to do this after- vision, antisiphoning, finding a chair for noon. I would like the Senate Community ACMA, the operational separation of Telstra, Affairs Committee to look at this petition Telstra’s local presence requirements, the

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 61 establishment of a national ‘do not call’ reg- Senator Coonan’s policy inaction in the ister and banning junk mail, the minister has communications portfolio is hurting the in- failed to take any firm decisions despite be- dustry. Today I am going to give just a few ing in the portfolio for more than 18 months. examples of this in the areas of the creation From broadcasting and telecommunications of ACMA, digital television, cross-media to postal services and IT, the communica- reform, junk mail and telemarketing. The tions portfolio under Senator Coonan has most publicly visible testament to the minis- been characterised by constant delay and ter’s failure to make the necessary decisions deferment of policy decisions. It has become in her portfolio is the empty seat at the head clear that Senator Coonan’s procession of of the boardroom table at the Australian committees, task forces, working groups, Communications and Media Authority. Leg- consultations, reviews and inquiries are noth- islation for the creation of ACMA was ing more than an increasingly ineffective fig passed by the Senate in March 2005. Plans leaf designed to hide her failure to tackle the for the creation of this new regulator had real issues. been in train for many months before this. Instead of addressing the big issues, the Yet today, almost six months after the official minister occupies herself with pork- birth of ACMA, the regulator is still a head- barrelling programs to placate Senator Joyce less chook and the minister has been unable and minor policy amendments to maintain to find a permanent chair for the body. the illusion of activity. The only substantive Again, this is one of those areas where the policy decision taken and being acted on by minister’s public rhetoric fails to match the the minister is the privatisation of Telstra, action that is being taken. and that was a decision made by the Liberal If you listen to the minister’s public Party in 1995. It is not as if the minister has statements on this issue, you could be for- had to invest much intellectual or political given for thinking that an appointment was capital in deciding to act on that issue. To imminent. After all, the minister has said as date, after 18 months in the job, the minister much on numerous occasions. On 16 June has not one substantive policy decision to her 2005 in a media report, the minister is quoted credit. as saying, ‘Shortly.’ On 24 June the minis- Senator Coonan has shown herself to be ter’s press release said that an announcement the minister for communications and pro- about the chair of ACMA would be made crastinations. She is the minister for ducking ‘shortly’. On 25 June the minister, in a media decisions and delaying deeds. Under Senator report, said, ‘A decision will be made Coonan, for every problem there is a review, shortly.’ On 12 July 2005 the minister, again for every dilemma there is an inquiry, for in a media report, said, ‘An announcement every quandary there is a task force and for can be expected shortly.’ On 28 July 2005 every challenge there is a committee. But for the minister, in another media report, said, nothing is there a decision. As the shadow ‘An announcement will be made in due minister in this area I fully appreciate that course.’ On 13 September 2005 a spokesman communications is a challenging policy area. was quoted in the media as saying, ‘Soon.’ However, the buck must stop with Senator On 31 October at Senate estimates, once Coonan as the minister responsible. Where again the minister said, ‘Very soon.’ there are tough decisions to be made, she And yet today, almost six months down must make them and not hide behind consul- the track, there is no new chair and the in- tations and departmental inquiries. dustry is starting to feel the effects. It seems

CHAMBER 62 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 that after 10 long years the government has tle incentive to invest in the technology. The run out of mates of John Howard for these current regime was always intended to be jobs. I know that will seem incredible, but transitional. When the digital rules were es- that can be the only explanation. It is more tablished back in 2000, the parliament in- than a little ironic that during the committee serted a requirement into the Broadcasting stage of the ACMA bill the minister herself Services Act 1992 that a series of eleven re- was lecturing the Senate on the need to pass views of the digital TV regime be conducted legislation establishing ACMA as quickly as in 2004-05. To date, all but one of the re- possible. She said: views have been completed, and yet only one It is, in this context, important that the ACMA is of those reviews has been released by the formed by the planned date. I want to impress minister. That is right—10 reports are sitting upon my Senate colleagues that the uncertainty on the minister’s desk as I speak. The re- generated by any delay will be disruptive to the views were intended to inform the parlia- regulators, the industry and the smooth function- ment and the community—not just the min- ing of the combined regulators. ister—about the way forward on digital TV. That was Senator Helen Coonan in February. The law requires that the reviews must be Her warnings have certainly been borne out. tabled within 15 sitting days after they are She was dead right. In the 100 days before completed. Reviews covering contentious the formation of ACMA, its predecessor, the issues such as multichannelling and the ACA, made 70 telecommunications policy fourth network were to have been conducted and regulatory announcements. In the 100 by 1 January 2005. Here we are at the end of days since the merger, in the absence of a November 2005 and those reports have still permanent chair, the ACMA has made only not seen the light of day. Earlier this month, I 25 such announcements—a fall in policy was forced to lodge a freedom of information output of almost two-thirds. And yet, the request to seek information that should have policy gridlock continues because the minis- been tabled in parliament. Senator Coonan’s ter refuses to acknowledge her mistake in arrogant refusal to release the reviews shows merging the roles of the CEO and the chair at a complete contempt for the parliament. Per- ACMA. Labor has offered, on a number of haps the department’s advice is inconsistent occasions, to support legislation to remedy with her political objective of appeasing the this mistake by splitting the role of the CEO media moguls, but the minister’s embarrass- and chair at ACMA in order to make it easier ment is no excuse for failing to comply with for the minister to find a suitable candidate. the law. However, to date, the minister has failed to Meanwhile, the take-up of digital televi- take up Labor’s offer and the industry is left sion in this country progresses at glacial adrift. speed. While UK consumers enjoy the Digital TV is another area suffering the ef- choice of around 30 free-to-air digital chan- fects of Senator Coonan’s policy paralysis. It nels and a range of interactive features, Aus- has been clear for some time now that the tralians are languishing in the digital dark government’s digital television policy is an age. The minister continues to preside over a abject failure. Digital broadcasts commenced regime which prevents the ABC from show- in 2001, but at present only around 12 per ing a drama, a comedy, national sport or na- cent of homes have bothered to make the tional news bulletins on its digital channel, switch to digital by purchasing a set-top box. called ABC2. The minister continues to pre- The current framework gives consumers lit- side over a regime which prevents SBS from

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 63 showing English language news on its world tinue to receive unwanted junk mail; it is news digital channel. How is the public in- now more than 12 months since that com- terest served by these restrictions? The min- mitment was made. And what has happened? ister concedes that taxpayers have already The department is still—you guessed it— paid $1 billion so that the national broadcast- consulting with the industry. That is right. ers can transmit in digital. So why won’t she We have not even got to the point where a give them something to watch? Why doesn’t discussion paper is released, and the minister the minister act on these issues instead of pretends that she has dealt with the issue. suppressing reports that have been prepared Perhaps the minister is seeking broad indus- to examine them? try support for the policy. Actual action to Of course, we know the reason for the in- implement the government’s election com- action. The minister has tied the digital re- mitment looks to be years away. forms to the government’s plan to abolish the A further example of the minister’s failure cross-media ownership laws. She wants to to take policy action instead of just procras- sugar-coat the bitter pill of increased media tinating can be seen with respect to the need concentration with some relaxation of the for a national do not call register to save digital regime. Senator Coonan has spent Australian families from annoying telemar- much of this year in closed-door talks with keting calls. The need for a national do not the media proprietors, trying to work out call list is an issue that Labor has been push- what changes are acceptable to them. Her ing for a number of years. Last year, tele- mantra has been that she is seeking broad marketing companies made more than a bil- industry support for the changes. When you lion calls in Australia—that is, 53 calls per give powerful players in the media industry person or 2.7 per household per week, a six an effective right of veto over your policy, it per cent increase on the previous year. While is not conducive to speedy decisions. Despite more than 320,000 people have signed up to being promised the release of a framework a voluntary do not call list maintained by the document outlining the government’s plan by Australian Direct Marketing Association, this the end of this year, what do we have as 2006 list binds only members of the ADMA and closes in on us? At the recent ACMA confer- has proven entirely ineffective. ence, Senator Coonan unveiled, to every- What has been the minister’s response to one’s surprise, that she would issue a discus- the issue? After denying the problem even sion paper in January. Yet another decision existed for 18 months and after Labor forced has been delayed. the government’s hand by introducing a pri- Senator Coonan has been no more effec- vate member’s bill on the issue, the minister tive or active in the postal services part of issued—you guessed it—another discussion her portfolio. At the last election, the centre- paper. Do you see a pattern emerging here? piece of the government’s postal policy was Australians are entitled to ask what the areas a commitment to stop junk mail being deliv- of contention are on the issue that would jus- ered to mailboxes with ‘no junk mail’ or ‘no tify commissioning a discussion paper rather advertising material’ signage. Last year our than just undertaking low-level consultation letterboxes were filled with 8.2 billion pieces with industry and then making a decision. of junk mail. This is a real source of irritation Australians are entitled to ask why they have for many householders. The government to endure being hassled by unwanted tele- promised to establish a complaints mecha- marketing calls for months while the minis- nism to give a remedy to people who con-

CHAMBER 64 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 ter delays making a decision yet again. (Time than 60 per cent of those women said they expired) lived in fear during the relationship. Nearly Domestic Violence 70 per cent of mothers who were victims of domestic violence said that their children had Senator KIRK (South Australia) (1.38 been witnesses to violence. pm)—I rise today to speak on a matter of public interest. I would like to begin by pos- Family violence is an issue I have raised ing a question. I ask senators in the chamber in this place on many occasions. It is a topic whether anyone can name the biggest public I will continue to raise despite the fact that it health risk to Australian women. The answer receives scant attention and far too little is not cancer, heart disease or motor vehicle funding from this government. I am the con- accidents. The greatest danger facing Austra- vener of the group Parliamentarians Against lian women is not a disease and it is not an Child Abuse. Family violence, much like accident. The answer is domestic violence. child abuse, is barely on the government ra- dar. It is relegated way down at the lower Overwhelmingly, most women who are end of its policy and funding agenda. This murdered or physically or sexually assaulted government was happy to spend $55 million in this country are killed or assaulted by their of taxpayers’ money promoting its extreme male partners. According to the latest homi- industrial relations campaign—and, of cide figures published this month, in No- course, that was before anyone had even vember 2005, by the Australian Institute of seen the detail of the legislation—but it has Criminology, 49 per cent of female murder shown very limited commitment, beyond victims are killed during a domestic argu- paying lip-service, to fixing the problem of ment. To put this into perspective, if we look domestic violence. at other figures for murder motives we find that only three per cent of women are killed As many senators would know, last Friday in what can be described as an alcohol fu- was White Ribbon Day, which is also known elled argument, five per cent are murdered in as the International Day for the Elimination a revenge attack and seven per cent are killed of Violence Against Women. On 25 Novem- over drugs or money. That is compared to, as ber every year we reflect on all the women in I said, 49 per cent who are killed during a Australia and overseas who have been killed domestic argument. by their partners and we acknowledge and make a pledge that we will do all we can do Statistically speaking, women have more to help women who continue to be physically to fear from their boyfriends, partners and and sexually assaulted and verbally abused husbands than from strangers. In my state of by their partners. On 25 November each year South Australia, almost 80 per cent of we wear a white ribbon to show that we are women who reported being physically as- prepared to speak out against domestic vio- saulted were attacked by their partners. The lence. Far too often women suffer in silence figure for sexual assault is even higher, with and the women who seek help are, sadly, 97 per cent of victims reporting that the as- often turned away. sault was perpetrated by an intimate family member. Bear in mind that these are the as- Earlier this month, a report prepared by saults which are reported to the police. Aus- the Women’s Services Network which had tralian research also shows that more than been shelved by the government, sadly, for one million Australian women have experi- over a year was secretly released onto the enced violence during a relationship. More Department of Family and Community Ser-

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 65 vices web site. This report, named Women’s fying any of the women involved—so that refuges, shelters, outreach and support ser- people are made aware of how desperately vices in Australia, identifies critical gaps in sad and tragic these cases are. I will give five the provision of crisis accommodation for examples of women speaking in their own women escaping domestic violence. The re- words. search, funded by the Office for Women, First: ‘My ex pinned me to the couch by surveyed 137 domestic violence support ser- holding me down by my throat, while hold- vices and policy makers. It reviewed ac- ing our then three-month-old daughter, after commodation for women and children flee- dragging me across the house. I remember ing family violence. The report’s author, not the choking but staring at my baby in his Julie Oberin, claims that this taxpayer funded arms, wondering what will happen to her if I report was hidden from the public for a pe- never take another breath.’ Second: ‘He put a riod of 21 months. It is no surprise when you hole in the kids’ bedroom door. Although see the main findings of this research. very shaken and realising this was pretty Some of the main concerns it identified much the final straw in a situation which was were as follows. It found that there is insuffi- obviously only getting worse, I never cient funding for emergency accommoda- thought to or had the guts to—I am still not tion, with one in two women—that is, 50 per sure which—call the police.’ Third: ‘I am cent of women—and two out of three chil- thankful that my ex stays away and makes no dren being turned away from refuges. These effort to see or do anything for my children. are women and children who are escaping The only contact we have is an earful of domestic violence. It also found that children abuse down the phone every few months.’ accompanying women are not treated as cli- Fourth: ‘My husband grabbed me by the ents. This means that the funding allocation throat, lifted me up by my throat and held me is inaccurate and therefore insufficient. It against the wall—all in front of our two- found that there are even more acute short- year-old.’ ages in rural and remote areas, with a dispro- In the fifth example the woman states: portionate impact on Indigenous women and ‘My husband held me against the wall with a their children. fist in my face, warning me that if he started Violence against women also costs the punching me he wouldn’t stop until I was in community money. An Access Economics intensive care. I eventually got him out of the report last year estimated that violence house and out of our lives. I called the police against women is costing Australia $8.1 bil- on two occasions. Both times, nothing hap- lion per year. Far too often when we talk pened. They warned him but did nothing else about domestic violence we talk about statis- and, the second time, gave us both a lecture tics. I have done that here today. But behind about arguing. I was humiliated and felt like these statistics there are desperately sad per- such a jerk that I never called them again.’ sonal stories. My office in Adelaide, South I will finish on one positive note. In Australia, has received many reports from China, the Standing Committee of the 10th women who have been the victims of domes- National People’s Congress recently adopted tic violence. Some have been threatened with amendments which make domestic violence knives; others have been punched and and sexual harassment illegal. For the first thrown against walls. Today I want to put on time in China’s history, victims now have the the public record a few examples that have right to file complaints. Women now have come to my attention—not, of course, identi-

CHAMBER 66 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 protection under the law in China. They followed by the Torres Strait Fisheries Act, know that sexual harassment and domestic which set up the Protected Zone Joint Au- violence are crimes and will not be tolerated. thority, an authority which manages the fish- I commend the government of China for put- eries in the Torres Strait. ting this important legislation in place. The Protected Zone Joint Authority, or Fisheries Management PZJA, as it is referred to, consists of the Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queen- Commonwealth minister—in this case, me— sland—Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and as the chairman and the Queensland minister Conservation) (1.48 pm)—At the end of last for fisheries as the other member. Last year I week I announced a major $220 million fish- brought amendments to this parliament to ing package from the Australian government include in the membership of the PZJA the to decisively end overfishing in Common- chairman of the Torres Strait Regional Au- wealth waters and to allow fishermen who thority. So, at the present time, the Torres have been doing it tough to leave the indus- Strait fisheries are managed by the PZJA, try with some dignity. It really has demon- consisting of me; Mr Gordon Nuttall, the strated that the Howard government is able Queensland minister; and Mr Toshie Kris, to manage the environment while at the same the chairman of the Torres Strait Regional time looking after the interests of an industry Authority. group in Australia—in this case, the fishing Under the Torres Strait Treaty and the Tor- industry—in a way that, I have to say with res Strait Fisheries Act, the PZJA is required some pride, has resulted in widespread sup- to have regard to the development of Torres port and commendation from environmental- Strait Islanders in the decisions it makes. It ists, the recreational and commercial fishing also, obviously and quite clearly, has to have industries and all of those with an interest in regard to the sustainable management of the sustainable fishing in Australia. That particu- fisheries in that area. There are some very lar package principally relates to the South good fisheries up in that area: the tropical East Fishery, which is on the coast of New rock lobster fishery; the coral trout fishery, South Wales, Victoria and around Tasmania; which is part of the finfish fishery; and the the East Coast Tuna and Billfish Fishery, Torres Strait Prawn Fishery. All are quite which is mainly along the east coast of Aus- valuable fisheries, bringing in some export tralia from Eden up to Cooktown; and the dollars and, in some areas, helping the is- Bass Strait Central Zone Scallop Fishery. landers to attain very useful employment. The package allows other Commonwealth Over a number of years there has been a licensed fishermen to retire. simmering problem between some of the There are other fisheries in which the islanders and some of the commercial fish- Commonwealth is interested which often do ermen about where the non-islander com- not get the headlines in the local papers. mercial fishermen have been fishing. There They are the fisheries in the Torres Strait. have been allegations that this has been ruin- Under the Torres Strait Treaty, which was ing the livelihood and indeed the pleasure signed and adopted more than 20 years ago, fishing of some of the islanders. It has been there was an arrangement to share the fisher- the source of some quite nasty incidents. ies in the Torres Strait area between Queen- There have been threats of violence and even slanders, Papua New Guineans, Torres Strait more; the police have been called. This issue Islanders and other Australians. That was has been very contentious in the Torres Strait

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 67

Islands for a number of years. There has also the action in the Torres Strait. The rules pro- been an ongoing demand for greater islander vide that the islanders can buy more than 50 involvement in these fisheries. But, of per cent, should they want to in the future. course, there were a lot of non-islander fish- The Howard government is very pleased ermen already legally licensed to fish in the to be part of this process. In the Torres Strait Torres Strait, and it is not appropriate to just there is not a lot of commercial and eco- throw them out and give all the fisheries to nomic activity that can continue. I think tour- the islanders. ism has a future, but it is only a fledgling For many years the PZJA has been grap- industry up there and there are a lot of prob- pling with this issue of how to address the lems to overcome. Because the Torres Strait Torres Strait fishing issues as they arise: sus- Islands are mainly small islands, there are tainability, islander involvement and fairness not many opportunities for agriculture, to all concerned. I am pleased to say that manufacturing or processing. There is not a about a month or so ago the PZJA was able big call for service industries. So the only to announce a new regime in the Torres real industry the Torres Strait Islanders have Strait. With money principally from the that can take them economically into the 21st Commonwealth government, some from the century is the fishing industry. In the past Queensland government and some from the they have not adopted the economic use of Torres Strait Regional Authority, we have put the industry, but I am quite certain that, with together a package whereby we will buy help from the PZJA and the Commonwealth from the existing non-islander fishermen government, this will occur in the future. sufficient licences to enable the islander fish- The decisions that have been made by the ermen to have a 50 per cent interest in the PZJA have not been easy. It is easy to talk rock lobster fishery and the finfish fishery. about them for 10 minutes in this chamber; it We have also made some arrangements to all seems pretty easy and matter of fact. But bring the Torres Strait Prawn Fishery to a one must understand the sentiments in the sustainable state and to do some things that islands, the wishes and aspirations of the should have been done when the treaty was islander people and the rights of the non- first announced 20 or more years ago, which islander fishermen to their fishing licences. we are able to do with some money, to be There has been a very difficult and quite fair to the Australian fishermen but to make lengthy set of negotiations over many years. sure that in future the fishery will be sustain- It has now reached a stage where, if I might able. borrow someone else’s words, peace in our With all of those fisheries we will be, over time has broken out in the islands. The is- the next few months, using an open tender landers will have the opportunity for very system for existing non-islander fishermen to successful and meaningful economic devel- tender their licences to the authority. The opment in the future. authority will then, using the money of the This is an indication that, given goodwill Commonwealth, Queensland and the TSRA, and a lot of hard work by a lot of people, you buy out licences not only to get the fisheries can achieve a result that is good for people, back to a sustainable state but also to ensure good for the environment and good for the that, in respect of those valuable rock lobster economy—in this case, the economy of a fisheries and the finfish fishery in the Torres particular locality. I particularly want to Strait, the islanders, for the first time ever, thank Mr Toshie Kris; Mr Wayne See Kee, will have a guaranteed 50 per cent share of

CHAMBER 68 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 the CEO of the TSRA; all my officials; the that. I also note that the questions no longer AFMA officials; the Queensland govern- have the term ‘extreme’. ment; the former minister, Mr Henry Pa- In relation to the Catholic welfare sector, I laszczuk, who was around for most of this; indicate to the honourable senator that we and the current minister, Mr Gordon Nuttall, always look at the comments from any or- for their work and the great work that has ganisation with the appropriate respect that a been achieved in getting these fisheries particular organisation might deserve and working on a sustainable basis that will pro- warrant. I say to senators opposite that those vide a future for the islanders in that area. in the Labor Party do not have a mortgage on QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE concern and compassion for those that are Workplace Relations living on low means. That is why we have a strategy called Welfare to Work, in order to Senator HURLEY (2.00 pm)—My ques- lift people out of the low income levels from tion is to Senator Abetz, the Minister repre- social security and into work where they will senting the Minister for Employment and be able to sustain themselves and enjoy a Workplace Relations. Is the minister aware higher level of income. I understand the of Catholic Welfare Australia’s concern that Catholic welfare sector expressed some fear those Australians who are targeted under the that this might happen. With great respect to government’s welfare changes are already that organisation, and others like it, I heard living below commonly accepted poverty very similar language employed by those lines? Is the minister also aware of Catholic organisations expressing those same sorts of Welfare Australia’s fear that the welfare fears about the goods and services tax. They changes will push single parents and people have never apologised to the Australian with disabilities further into poverty and that community about their expression of fears. ‘any reduction in personal income in these Indeed, as we now know, instead of one mil- circumstances will have direct effects on lion Australians living on the poverty line on household spending on necessities ... with unemployment benefits, we now have halved children in these families most dramatically that number as a result of our policies. affected’? Why is the government so intent on driving Australian children into poverty I am willing to accept that this particular by dumping their parents onto the lower in- organisation is genuinely motivated and well come of the dole instead of the pension after meaning in its expression of fears in this re- 1 July 2006? gard, but I remind them that they were similarly well motivated some years ago when Senator ABETZ—One detects that the similar concerns were expressed about the honourable senator would not have voted for introduction of a GST. Those fears were not Mr Latham in the leadership competition realised. Indeed, the Australian population, because she did not end her question, with by any measure of poverty, is now substan- the usual tactic of those opposite, by trying tially better off. The great thing has been to suggest that it was somehow a US type that, yes, the rich have got richer but, at an system. It is interesting to observe that those even faster rate, the poorer have been getting opposite who would try to make the US link richer as well. As a result, everybody in Aus- were all the ones that voted for Mr Latham. tralia has shared in the increased wealth of But the likes of Senator Conroy, who is now the nation, including, might I add, the pen- very busy with his head down, Senator Hut- sioners of this country, because we were able chins and others, of course, would not use to link the pension to the male total average

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 69 weekly earnings, MTAWE, which has deliv- Workplace Relations ered a real increase to the pensioners of Aus- Senator SANTORO (2.07 pm)—My tralia above and beyond the consumer price question is to the Special Minister of State, index, something which Labor could never Senator Abetz, representing the Minister for do during their 13 years of mismanagement Employment and Workplace Relations. Min- of the Australian economy. Those opposite ister, what evidence is available to support have all the propaganda; we deliver. (Time the need for further labour market reform in expired) Australia? How is the Howard government Senator HURLEY—Mr President, I ask responding to this evidence? Is the minister a supplementary question. If the minister aware of any alternative policies? does not accept the view of Catholic Welfare Honourable senators interjecting— Australia, does the minister agree with the The PRESIDENT—Order! I will call the member for Pearce, who said, in speaking on minister when the chamber comes to order. the bill today, ‘I am deeply concerned about the cut in income support ... I am deeply Senator ABETZ—Thank you, Mr Presi- concerned about the effects this ... might dent. It is a pleasant change to have the have on children’? Does the minister accept chamber so quiet when I am on my feet. Mrs Moylan’s conclusion that the income Honourable senators interjecting— cuts contained in the government’s package Senator ABETZ—I was testing fate, do not deserve the support of parliament? wasn’t I? I thank Senator Santoro for his Why is the government so intent on forcing question and acknowledge the wonderful through savage and extreme welfare cuts that reforms that he introduced in the state of the churches and its own backbench know Queensland whilst he was the Minister for will have the effect of increasing child pov- Training and Industrial Relations, reforms erty? which are allowing the people of Queensland Senator ABETZ—They could not help to benefit in relation to the economic boom themselves. She must have overlooked the they are experiencing at the moment. word ‘extreme’ in the original question and What is the evidence for the need for la- quickly slipped it in so that she would not get bour market reform? Those opposite, includ- into trouble with the Opposition Whip for ing my good friend Senator Murray, continu- not having used the word. But, of course, she ally say there is no empirical evidence to will be in trouble with the union bosses for suggest the need for labour market reform. not having used the term linking it to a US There are in fact no less than 84 academic type system. I am not aware of the comments studies supporting the need for further re- of the member for Pearce, but I am aware of form of the labour market. I am not talking the comments of many members about the about the sorts of dodgy academic studies leadership of Mr Beazley and the direction in which those on the other side commission, which he is taking the Australian Labor Party like left-leaning former trade union activists. at the moment. Until such time as the Austra- I am talking about real empirical research, lian Labor Party actually come up with an evidence like macroeconomic data which alternative policy, other than a slogan that compares the 1982 to 1993 period, pre re- was announced today, I suggest to them that form, to that of the post-1993 reforms, evi- they have no right to even engage in this de- dence which shows that, among other things, bate. employment growth was 1.6 per cent before

CHAMBER 70 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 reforms and 2.2 per cent after; inflation was The OECD has just released its six- 6.6 per cent per year before reforms and only monthly economic outlook and I quote from 2.3 per cent after; interest rates were 12.8 per it: cent before reforms and 2.3 per cent after; Rapid implementation of the planned industrial and, finally, real wages, which fell 1.4 per relations reform … would promote productivity cent before reforms— gains … Senator Sherry—Do you want to men- So I urge all those on the other side, includ- tion national debt? ing the Australian Democrats, to accept the The PRESIDENT—Senator Sherry, 84 studies and the need for industrial reform. shouting across the chamber is grossly disor- DISTINGUISHED VISITORS derly and I ask you to come to order. The PRESIDENT—Order! I draw the at- Senator ABETZ—For the benefit of tention of honourable senators to the pres- Senator Sherry, I will repeat myself: finally, ence in the chamber of a parliamentary dele- real wages, which fell 1.4 per cent before gation from the Democratic Republic of reforms, grew by 14.3 per cent after reforms. Timor-Leste, led by Mr Faustino Godinho da Or how about the international academic Costa MP. On behalf of all senators, I wish research which shows that less labour market you a very warm welcome to Australia and, regulation is clearly associated with better in particular, to our Senate. economic performance—for example, such Honourable senators—Hear, hear! as in New Zealand, which has the lowest QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE unemployment rate in the OECD—and evidence which shows that, unless further la- Welfare to Work bour market reforms are undertaken in this Senator WEBBER (2.12 pm)—My ques- country, our standard of living will fall? tion is also to Senator Abetz, the Minister The evidence is clear. It shows that work- representing the Minister for Employment place relations reforms reduce unemploy- and Workplace Relations. Can the minister ment, reduce poverty, increase wages, im- confirm that there will be a $51 cut in fort- prove job security and lift living standards. nightly benefits paid to sole parents who go That is why the government is pursuing fur- onto Newstart instead of the parenting pay- ther reforms with Work Choices—to ensure ment single after 1 July 2006 and an $84 cut prosperity for the future of all Australians. in fortnightly benefits for people with dis- Given the weight of all this evidence, I sug- abilities who go onto Newstart instead of the gest that those opposite are like ostriches disability support pension after 1 July 2006? seeking to hide by putting their heads in the Don’t figures provided by the Department of sand. But the Chicken Little or Ossie Ostrich Employment and Workplace Relations reveal approach of those opposite is, as I character- that the impact of these cuts will be to de- ised it yesterday, the son of roll-back, or ‘rip- liver $1 billion worth of savings back to the up’. This is a policy which I predict Labor in government in the three years to 2008-09? fact will adopt, like Mr Blair did in the Can the minister now explain why the gov- United Kingdom, Helen Clark did in New ernment has been so keen to hide the mas- Zealand and Premier Steve Bracks did in sive $1 billion worth of savings that it will Victoria. reap by slashing benefits paid to around 140,000 sole parents and people with a dis-

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 71 ability who will get the dole rather than the him to answer whether or not, in addition to more generous pension after 1 July 2006? $3.6 billion of expenditure, there is $1 billion Senator ABETZ—I have been at pains in savings by paying people less in income over the last few weeks to point out that we support? are making a $3.6 billion investment in the The PRESIDENT—The minister has al- people of Australia who are not with a job at most two minutes left to answer the question. the moment. That $3.6 billion is an invest- I remind him of the question and also remind ment in all those individual Australians who senators of what happened yesterday. Con- are capable of doing work but at the moment tinual points of order do mean reduced ques- are not engaged in the work force. As the tions. Labor Party finally conceded the other day, it Senator Conroy interjecting— is vitally important, if we are to engage peo- The PRESIDENT—I don’t need any ad- ple in the benefits of Australian society gen- vice, thank you, Senator Conroy. erally, that we engage them in the work force. That is a key indicator of future pros- Senator ABETZ—For the benefit of perity and future wellbeing, not only for Senator Evans, I will repeat myself. It is a those that work but also for the children in pity, because I think most of his colleagues that family or home unit. understand, but he does not seem to understand. What I was indicating was that a $3.6 We have made a $3.6 billion investment. billion investment in relation to those people It might come as a surprise to those opposite who are currently without work is designed but, when we from time to time make an in- to also get a return. We on this side do be- vestment, we also think that there might be a lieve in returns on investment. Our first re- return on that investment. In this case, the turn on investment is not to be considered in return on the investment is in the wellbeing monetary terms but in social terms. That is of every single Australian that we are able to why I was at pains to point out the benefits move from welfare into work. Of course, the to the individual Australians who will benefit more people that are in work, the lower the from that $3.6 billion investment into work. liability to the Australian taxpayer in relation They will be moving off welfare into work. to social security payments. It just confirms It stands to reason that, when people move once again that the Labor Party’s policy is to off welfare into work and self-sustaining keep the people on welfare, to throw money funding, there will not be as much money at them, to wash your hands and say you needed to pay them welfare. As a result, have done your duty. We say that that is not there will be taxation benefits to fellow Aus- good enough. We say that those individual tralians. It is part of our mutual obligation Australians who do not have a job deserve belief that— more than welfare. Senator Chris Evans—Do you know the Senator Chris Evans—Mr President, I answer or not? Do you have any clue? You rise on a point of order. It goes to relevance. are the responsible minister. The minister was asked a very specific question about whether or not he could confirm The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator Ev- that $1 billion worth of savings will flow to ans, I remember remarks you made here this the government because they are paying morning about conduct of senators in this people less in benefits after 1 July 2006. place. I would hope you would be like- Could you draw him to that question and ask minded.

CHAMBER 72 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Senator Chris Evans—Mr President, on cipients, she should be honest enough to say a point of order: I accept your decision, but I that that $1 billion being pulled out is in fact do point out that I raised a point of order ear- being replaced by $3.6 billion that we are lier in order to get the minister to focus on investing in them. Until such time as those the question. We will not bother asking ques- opposite are willing to give a true and bal- tions unless there is some requirement for anced focus on what we are actually doing, ministers to answer them. At the moment, we they are continuing to mislead the Australian are not getting any attempt to answer the people. I suggest that Senator Webber get the question. I accept your ruling, Mr President, figure of $3.6 billion, take $1 billion off that, but I do point out that frustration flows from and conclude that the welfare recipient com- the failure of the minister to answer the ques- munity will still be $2.6 billion better off. tion. Future Fund The PRESIDENT—I cannot direct the Senator FIFIELD (2.20 pm)—My ques- minister how to answer the question; I can tion is to the Minister for Finance and Ad- remind him of the question. I continually do ministration, Senator Minchin. Will the min- so. I also remind the minister of relevance. ister inform the Senate of the importance of Senator ABETZ—How very patronising establishing the Future Fund to meet the of the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate government’s future obligations? Is the min- to accept your ruling, Mr President. In rela- ister aware of any alternative policies? tion to the matter that was raised, I confirm Senator MINCHIN—I thank Senator again that, yes, there will be savings made, Fifield for that very good question. As most because we do expect returns on our invest- know, this government has been very suc- ment, but the most important return on our cessful in reducing net debt from the $96 investment is not to be considered in mone- billion debt that we inherited from Labor to tary terms, as those opposite would like to only $12 billion, and we expect to eliminate portray; the return on investment that we are that debt next year. By virtue of that, we seeking is the social one. have cut the annual interest bill by $5 billion Senator WEBBER—Mr President, I ask a year. Our net debt as a percentage of GDP a supplementary question. I note that the is now down to just 1.3 per cent. The OECD minister has refused to deny the fact that part average is 48 per cent. The US has a net debt of the savings will come after 1 July 2006 by of 50 per cent of GDP. Europe’s is 58 per paying people less fortnightly in benefit. cent and Japan’s is 82 per cent. By reducing Isn’t it the case that the $1 billion worth of our net debt to negligible levels, we are in a savings that the government stands to reap much better position than those countries to from its welfare changes will come directly face the demographic challenges that all out of the pockets of people with disabilities Western nations face. and sole parents who go onto the lower dole Senator Conroy interjecting— payment instead of the pension if they apply The PRESIDENT—Senator Conroy! for income support after 1 July 2006? Senator MINCHIN—The net debt is just Senator ABETZ—I do not know what one of our liabilities. Over 100 years, this the basic mathematics was for Senator Web- nation has built up unfunded superannuation ber when she went to school but, put very liabilities of some $91 billion today. We ex- simply, if we are ‘pulling’, to use her term, pect that to grow to $140 billion. These li- $1 billion out of the pockets of welfare re- abilities must be paid to former public ser-

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 73 vants. At the moment, that is costing us $4 health and ageing costs that this nation is billion a year off the budget, and that will going to face. But, of course, under Labor’s rise to $7 billion a year every year by 2020. policy there is no hope of the Future Fund That is the very reason why we have decided being able to meet that $140 billion liability to create a future fund—that is, to meet that that will face this nation. That is absolutely liability of the unfunded superannuation. It is typical of Labor’s approach to fiscal policy. a very important step in meeting the task of Their approach represents— facing our demographic challenge. Senator Conroy interjecting— The Future Fund will receive the surpluses The PRESIDENT—Senator Conroy! from the annual budget and the proceeds of Senator MINCHIN—in fact, a substan- asset sales. By doing so, we can meet that tial loosening of annual fiscal policy. unfunded superannuation liability. But the unfunded super liability can only be met if Senator Conroy—Rubbish! we ensure that the earnings of this fund are Senator Sherry interjecting— reinvested into the fund. That is obviously a The PRESIDENT—Senator Sherry! function of compound interest, which most Senator MINCHIN—It will mean more people understand. But, unfortunately, the government spending, by virtue of them Labor Party do not understand the principle spending the earnings rather than their being of compound interest. They simply do not reinvested into the future fund. Of course understand the obligation we have to meet their policy would cripple Australia’s capac- this unfunded liability and how we should go ity to meet the challenge of an ageing popu- about doing it. Extraordinarily, last week, the lation. Labor has consistently opposed all our Leader of the Opposition announced that efforts to reduce government debt, having Labor’s policy in relation to our Future Fund left it to us for the future. And now their pol- is to actually spend all the earnings of the icy is to make it impossible for Australia to fund. Yes, they will keep a fund, and what- meet the unfunded super liability. Unlike ever is in it— Labor, the coalition is very focused on this Senator Conroy interjecting— very substantial challenge that we have of an The PRESIDENT—Senator Conroy! ageing population, and our Future Fund is a Senator MINCHIN—if they come to vital part of meeting that challenge. government. But they are then going to Workplace Relations spend all the earnings out of that fund on Senator STEPHENS (2.24 pm)—I, too, their pet projects—their pork-barrelling to have a serious question to ask of Minister earn them votes. So they are effectively go- Abetz, the Minister representing the Minister ing to replace our Future Fund with what for Employment and Workplace Relations. Is they call ‘the here and now fund’, so they the minister aware of concerns expressed by will just take the capital, but no earnings; all the Christian Reformed Churches of Austra- the earnings will go out on their pet projects. lia in New South Wales about the govern- Our policy, which is based on reinvesting ment’s industrial relations policies? Does the those earnings, is going to save future gov- minister support the church’s view that ernments $7 billion a year by virtue of that workers should not be compelled to work on fund meeting the superannuation liability, Sunday, especially when their original terms meaning that future governments, under our of employment included such a provision? policy, will have $7 billion extra to meet the Does the minister also accept that the desire

CHAMBER 74 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 of employees to be free to worship on Sun- The PRESIDENT—Resume your seat, day should not be allowed as a valid reason Senator Conroy. On the previous question, for discrimination against workers in any you interjected over 20 times. You have been way, including the decision to employ a new very disruptive throughout question time. I employee? Is it the government’s intention am willing for you to make your point of that freedom to worship and practise spiritual order, but if I have any more disruption from and religious convictions not be overruled you today, I will have to name you. but instead protected by its industrial rela- Senator Conroy—Thank you, Mr Presi- tions policies? dent. My point of order goes to relevance. Senator ABETZ—Allow me to declare While I admit it is very interesting to learn an interest right up front. Undoubtedly, those about what the Tasmanian government are up on the other side have done their research. I to in terms of deregulation or otherwise of am a member of the Christian Reformed public— Churches of Australia, and I have a brother Government senators—New South who is a minister of religion in those Wales! churches. So I will get that out of the way, in Senator Conroy—or New South Wales— case somebody wants to spin it. The PRESIDENT—Order! But Senator Stephens said that she, too, had a serious question. The only question to Senator Conroy—While I am interested which she could have related that must have in all of those things, I was wondering if you been Senator Santoro’s question, because might draw the attention of the minister to that has been the only other serious question the question from Senator Stephens, which I have had today in question time. If Senator was about a very specific matter. Stephens was genuinely concerned about The PRESIDENT—Senator Abetz, you people working on a Sunday, especially have two and a half minutes. about the need for people to go to church, Senator ABETZ—Thank you, Mr Presi- she might like to explain to the Christian dent. I can understand the embarrassment of Reformed Churches of Australia, and indeed Senator Conroy, but it is now, of course, everybody else in New South Wales, why her compounded. I was not referring to the state state Labor government is going to be open- of Tasmania. I was referring to the state La- ing the pubs for open-slather trading for bor government of New South Wales, a La- Sundays. bor Party that used to have as its President, if Honourable senators interjecting— not still at the moment, one Senator Ursula The PRESIDENT—Order! Stephens— Senator ABETZ—Those opposite— Senator Conroy—Mr President, on a point of order: I am wondering whether it is Senator Conroy—Mr President, I rise on relevant to the question whether Senator a point of order— Stephens was the President of the New South The PRESIDENT—Senator Conroy, I Wales branch of the Labor Party or not. I cannot hear your point of order for your col- thought you might like to make a ruling on leagues’ shouting. that. Senator Conroy—I cannot hear you for The PRESIDENT—There is no point of the shouting over there, Mr President. order. Senator Abetz, you have two hours—

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 75 minutes and 22 seconds. I would ask you to of Australia is that her own state Labor gov- return to the question. ernment of New South Wales is opening the Senator ABETZ—Mr President, I wish I pubs and clubs on Sundays— did have two hours, because what I am point- Senator George Campbell interjecting— ing out is the absolute duplicity and hypoc- The PRESIDENT—Order! risy of those who profess to argue that some- Senator ABETZ—which will mean more how people should not have to work on a people will have to work on Sundays. So she Sunday but then deliberately pursue policies cannot have it two ways, Mr President. And that allow pubs and gambling venues to be that is the total problem of those opposite: open on a Sunday. How are people going to they operate in a policy vacuum— be served the beers in the pubs in New South Wales on a Sunday? By robots, no doubt. Senator George Campbell interjecting— Can I suggest that they are going to be The PRESIDENT—Senator George served by workers? And why will they be Campbell! required to work in pubs in New South Senator ABETZ—they jump onto one Wales on a Sunday? Because of state Labor’s bandwagon, thinking they can make a cheap policy. This is the problem when you operate political point, without realising— in a policy vacuum, as the Labor Party does. Senator George Campbell interjecting— Senator Chris Evans—Mr President, on The PRESIDENT—Senator Campbell, I a point of order: this goes to the question of ask you to come to order. relevance. The minister has had about three minutes. Senator Stephens raised the con- Senator ABETZ—the consequences of cerns that the Christian Reformed Churches foolishly entering into a debate of which they have expressed to all senators in writing re- have no understanding. Mr President, I per- garding the government’s industrial relations sonally happen to believe in Sunday obser- policy. Those concerns were taken up by vance. I happen to believe it is very impor- Senator Stephens in her question. The minis- tant. But I will not be in a position to legis- ter has made no attempt to respond to those late for all Australians that they have Sunday concerns, which are legitimate concerns. I observance—for people who profess the ask you to require him to return to the ques- Christian faith, as I seek to do—inasmuch as tion, because all he has done is seek to abuse we do not do it for the Jewish community on Senator Stephens and others, and has made a Saturday or for Seventh Day Adventists on no attempt to answer the question. a Saturday. If there is to be consistency in the argument of the honourable senator, we The PRESIDENT—The minister has a would need to legislate for everybody’s po- minute and a half, and no doubt he will have tential religious belief. The great thing about a supplementary question as well, about the Work Choices is that there is flexibility and same matter, but I would remind the minister workers can work it out with their bosses. of the question once again. (Time expired) Senator ABETZ—Mr President, the Senator STEPHENS—Mr President, I question was about the attitude of the Chris- ask a supplementary question. If I could be- tian Reformed Churches to workers having gin by reiterating the question: is it the gov- to work on a Sunday, with Senator Stephens ernment’s intention that freedom to wor- pretending to champion that cause. What I ship— am pointing out to the Senate and the people

CHAMBER 76 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Government senators interjecting— vide improved medical services to people The PRESIDENT—Order! living in rural and regional Australia? Senator STEPHENS—and practise spiri- Senator PATTERSON—I thank the hon- tual and religious convictions not be over- ourable senator for her question and I ac- ruled but instead protected by its industrial knowledge her interest in rural issues, in par- relations policy? That was the question. Does ticular rural issues relating to health. We are the minister support his backbench colleague very proud of the record of investment in Senator Santoro, who said that the views rural and regional health services. Since expressed by the Uniting Church of the gov- 1996, there has been a 20 per cent increase in ernment’s policies are ‘fundamentally dan- the number of doctors in country areas. In gerous’—his words? Does the minister be- New South Wales, there has been a 5.5 per lieve that groups like the Uniting Church and cent increase in bulk-billing rates since 2003, the Christian Reformed Churches have no to over 81 per cent, and in rural and remote right to put their point of view about how areas of Australia the bulk-billing rate has they see the impact of government policy on increased by over 15 per cent. family life and religious observance? We are investing $830 million over four Senator ABETZ—I will not accept the years under the Rural Health Strategy, which President of the New South Wales Labor is aimed at improving the general health and Party’s comments in relation to what Senator wellbeing of rural Australians. This strategy Santoro said, because I have a funny feeling will provide a flexible package of health, that she is trying to verbal him. In relation to aged care and work force initiatives to in- the views of the Christian Reformed crease their access to services. Under the Churches, they undoubtedly have a right to strategy, 2,000 long-serving rural doctors are put that view. But, with great respect, I hap- receiving bonus payments of up to $25,000 pen to disagree with them, and I trust that per year to encourage them and to keep them they have written to every New South Wales practising in rural areas. One thousand one MP protesting about the state Labor govern- hundred rural practitioners have nurses— ment’s policy on opening pubs on a Sunday. these are practice nurses in rural practices— The good thing about Work Choices is that it and there are 600 allied health professionals allows employers and employees to sit down working with country GPs. It makes a huge together and work out that which is needed. I difference to those GPs to have that assis- believe that members of the Christian Re- tance. formed Churches of Australia would make There are 11 rural clinical schools, includ- very good employees, and employers would ing the University of Sydney Dubbo rural be more than willing to accommodate them. clinical school, with nodes in Dubbo, Orange (Time expired) and Bathurst. I think having these rural clini- Rural and Regional Health Services cal schools throughout Australia is one of the major measures that the Howard government Senator NASH (2.33 pm)—My question has put in place to encourage young people is to the Minister for Family and Community to study in rural areas. When you visit, for Services and Minister Assisting the Prime example, the rural school in Wagga, the stu- Minister for Women’s Issues, Senator Patter- dents tell you they do not want to go back to son. Will the minister advise the Senate of the city—even city students. So it is a tre- initiatives by the federal government to pro- mendous initiative which is now having real

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 77 dividends. Twenty-five per cent of medical QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE students are required to do at least 50 per Australian Research Council cent of their clinical training in country areas Senator STOTT DESPOJA (2.38 pm)— and, since 2001, there have been 346 addi- My question is addressed to the Minister tional medical school places in Australian representing the Minister for Education, Sci- universities, each one bonded to country ence and Training. I refer to Minister Nel- practice or practice in areas of work force son’s decision to interfere with seven pro- shortage. jects recommended for funding by the Aus- From next year, the Howard government tralian Research Council. Is the minister will provide $4 million for a new rural unaware of comments by a number of people, dergraduate allied health scholarship scheme. including former ARC Chief Executive Offi- There will be up to 180 scholarships a year, cer, Professor Vicki Sara, who said: worth $10,000 per annum. There is solid Political interference in that process would dam- evidence that rural students are more likely age our international reputation and steer us down to seek and maintain employment in a rural a middle-of-the-road, conservative research path area after completing their studies. Support- … ing students from rural areas, this scheme And there were similar comments by the will help to improve future recruitment and Australian Vice-Chancellors Committee retention of allied health professionals in CEO, John Mullarvey, who said: rural and remote areas. These new scholar- Any minister should not have the ability to inter- ships complement the government’s existing fere with this process … However, in the event allied health postgraduate scholarships and that a minister does interfere, there ought to be also supplements the government’s allied transparency. health professional measure announced as I ask the minister: what transparent processes part of the ‘Strengthening Medicare’ policy. will be developed for allocating research The measures that I have outlined form just a grants, and will the details of decisions by part of the excellent record of the Howard Minister Nelson be made public and pub- government in delivering better health and lished in the ARC annual report? medical services to people in rural and regional Australia. Senator VANSTONE—I thank the senator for the question. I have not seen remarks DISTINGUISHED VISITORS by Professor Sara or, for that matter, by John The PRESIDENT—I draw the attention Mullarvey from the Vice-Chancellors Com- of honourable senators to the presence in the mittee in relation to alleged political interfer- chamber of a delegation from Israel, led by ence by the minister. Mr Reuven Rivlin, Speaker of the Knesset. Senator Carr—It is not alleged. On behalf of all senators, I wish you a very warm welcome to Australia, and particularly Senator VANSTONE—I am sorry, Sena- to our Senate. With the concurrence of hon- tor? ourable senators, I propose to invite Mr Riv- Senator Carr—It is a proven fact. lin to take a seat on the floor of the Senate. The PRESIDENT—Senator Carr! Honourable senators—Hear, hear! Senator VANSTONE—The senator ob- Mr Rivlin was seated accordingly. viously has a view. In relation to Senator Stott Despoja’s question, there is often debate over the degree to which people should

CHAMBER 78 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 be given money and allowed to do what they a proposal that government savings in terms like with it. But there is an obvious require- of education should come out of the research ment of accountability. The government does budget rather than out of the operating have to account to taxpayers, through the budget. (Time expired) parliament, for what it does with taxpayers’ Fishing Industry money. There are obviously quite reasonable Senator MASON (2.42 pm)—My ques- situations where the minister is required to tion is to the Minister for Fisheries, Forestry set some parameters on how money is used. I and Conservation, Senator Ian Macdonald. make that point generally. I have not seen Will the minister update the Senate on the what Professor Sara said or what John Mul- Howard government’s Securing our Fishing larvey said. The minister has not provided a Future package which was announced last brief on that issue, so I will ask him if he has Wednesday? got anything to say to help you. Senator IAN MACDONALD—Senator Senator STOTT DESPOJA—Mr Presi- Mason, as he travels around Queensland—as dent, I ask a supplementary question. I thank I know he does often—will understand the the minister for that undertaking and ask the importance of fishing, in all of its forms, to minister: given that she has stated to the the economy of Queensland and, indeed, of chamber that the minister has to work within Australia. It is not every day that you can get certain parameters, will the government pub- commercial fishermen, recreational fisher- lish in detail why exactly projects are or are men and conservationists to agree on some- not rejected? Specifically, will the govern- thing, but I am delighted to say that that is ment now make public, and publish in the exactly what the Howard government has annual ARC report, the specifics as to why been able to do. The $220 million Securing these seven projects, which were approved our Fishing Future package that I announced for funding by the ARC, were rejected by the last Wednesday is the most significant fisher- minister. They were recommended for fund- ies adjustment package in the history of ing and approved for funding—but not by Commonwealth fisheries. the minister. The package will safeguard fish stocks by Senator VANSTONE—As I recall, there quite dramatically cutting the catches across was one occasion when I was education min- a range of fisheries, and at the same time it ister when I refused an ARC proposal. It was will secure a profitable future for the fishing an ARC recommendation. The system is not industry by removing vessels. It will also set up whereby there is a bucket of money allow the many small fishermen, who are and people can do as they choose. We do doing it tough at the moment, to exit the in- have a system whereby people who are dustry with some dignity. It is all about mak- qualified in the field make recommendations. ing the tough decisions today so that we do But that is not the same as the right to do as have a fishery tomorrow. they choose. So I will refer your question to Dr Nelson and see if he can assist. The reaction to the package has been fairly positive all round. In addition to en- By way of interest in this matter, I have a dorsements from the Australian Seafood In- very strong interest in basic research and the dustry Council, the Humane Society Interna- need to have it applied in the future. And you tional, the Australian Conservation Founda- may care to know, Senator, that in 1996 the tion, recreational fishermen and other fishing Australian Vice-Chancellor’s Committee put

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 79 leaders, the World Wide Fund for Nature ment ever in Australia’s history. Only the said: Howard government understands what it This bold pledge aims to restructure fisheries takes to look after the environment whilst management arrangements in order to rebuild also sustaining our industry, our jobs and healthy marine ecosystems and healthy fish popu- particularly our regional communities. Of lations in Australian Commonwealth waters course, it all starts with keeping the economy The Australian Marine Conservation Society strong. That is what the Howard government said: is about: economic strength, border security, This package now gives us an opportunity to help protecting our future and protecting our in- improve the management of our fisheries and to dustries like fishing. better protect Australia’s fragile deep water habi- Mr Robert Gerard tats. Senator SHERRY (2.46 pm)—My ques- The South East Trawl Fishing Industry Asso- tion is to the Minister for Finance and Ad- ciation said, ‘SETFIA applauds the govern- ministration, Senator Minchin, representing ment’s commitment to ecologically sustain- the Treasurer. Did the minister have any dis- able fisheries, which go hand in hand with an cussions with the Treasurer or the Prime economically viable fishing industry.’ The Minister regarding the appointment of Mr Commonwealth Fisheries Association said: Gerard to the Reserve Bank board either be- ‘The government has obviously listened to fore or after cabinet considered the Treas- representations from a range of stakeholders, urer’s proposal? Were the details of tax of- including industry managers, researchers and fice investigations into Gerard Industries’ tax conservationists involved in these fisheries.’ avoidance schemes raised during these dis- Over the next few months, the Australian cussions, including that they involved delib- government will be consulting with industry erate behaviour by Mr Gerard to establish an and conservationists on the design and im- avoidance scheme using tax havens in the plementation of this package. We will also be Caribbean islands and making false and mis- putting in place a range of measures to en- leading statements to tax office auditors? sure that, even if we live as long as the or- Can the minister confirm that he expressed ange roughy—and that is 150 years, Mr his concern to the Treasurer about the propri- President, as you would well know—we will ety of appointing someone facing unresolved never again see overfishing in Common- tax allegations to the Reserve Bank board? wealth fisheries. To put it another way, you Senator Hill—Mr President, it may be could say that overfishing in Commonwealth that Senator Minchin wants to answer the waters is now as dead as the bullyboy union question, but it does strike me that it is not dominance of our workplace will be once our strictly within his portfolio. I would ask you workplace reform legislation is passed. to consider whether the question was in fact The Securing our Fishing Future package in order. builds on the Howard government’s well- The PRESIDENT—I think the question deserved reputation for being able to balance is in order, because he does represent the the protection of our environment with the Treasurer in this place. needs of industry and regional communities. Senator MINCHIN—Mr President, I am These achievements are part of the reason happy to answer the question, although the Australians are coming to realise that the question was asked to me as the Minister Howard government is the greenest govern- representing the Treasurer and then he asked

CHAMBER 80 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 me about my personal conversations with the East Timor Treasurer. So the question was very badly Senator BOB BROWN (2.49 pm)—This worded at least and probably is out of order question is to the Minister representing the at worst. Nevertheless, let me say that, as far Minister for Foreign Affairs. Is he aware that as I am concerned, the process by which Mr the minister last year, on the 56th anniver- Gerard was appointed to the Reserve Bank sary of the adoption of the Universal Decla- board was proper and in accordance with ration of Human Rights, in announcing normal procedures, and was subject to proper grants to human rights groups in the poorest cabinet consideration and cabinet agreement. country of our region, East Timor, said that Mr Gerard, in the view of the government, Australia has a proud tradition of protecting remains a fit and proper person to serve on and promoting human rights and of support- the Reserve Bank board. All the Labor Party ing grassroots organisations that do so? Is it is trying to do is create as much political flak true that the government has since stripped as they can because Mr Gerard has publicly that funding from the 13 struggling organisa- declared his support for the private enterprise tions in this new democracy to our north be- party of this country, and that is the Liberal cause they dared to sign an advertisement Party. This is a witch-hunt being directed at which was critical of the Australian govern- Mr Gerard for partisan reasons, which is be- ment about East Timor oil and gas resources? neath contempt. Will this shameful action by the Minister for Senator SHERRY—Mr President, I ask a Foreign Affairs be reviewed, and will the supplementary question. I ask again: can the government restore this funding to these minister confirm that he did express serious much-needed organisations in this fledgling concerns to the Treasurer and the Prime Min- democracy? ister about the appointment of Mr Gerard? Senator HILL—I would need to refer the Didn’t the minister also express these con- detail of the question to the Minister for For- cerns during the cabinet discussion about the eign Affairs, but, speaking generally, Austra- appointment of Mr Gerard? Were the minis- lia has been a strong contributor to the new ter’s serious concerns based on the tax scam, country of East Timor. In fact, it would not on the minister’s longstanding antipathy to today be an independent state if it were not Mr Gerard in South Australian Liberal poli- for the contribution of Australia. The How- tics or on his knowledge that Mr Gerard do- ard government showed great courage in its nated more than $1 million to the Liberal decisions in relation to East Timor—courage Party in South Australia? that was never shown by the Australian La- The PRESIDENT—Minister, I do not bor Party, I might say, in its 13 years in of- believe some of those issues are in your port- fice. The brave and courageous Australian folio. If you wish to answer the ones that are Defence Force supported the government relevant, you may. and helped the East Timorese achieve a just Senator MINCHIN—Mr President, I independence. think that question is out of order, but let me Since then, the Australian government has say for the record that I do support Mr been East Timor’s strongest supporter in Gerard’s appointment to the Reserve Bank helping it build a viable state. That is a diffi- board. I continue to believe, as does the gov- cult challenge for any new country, but for ernment, that he is a fit and proper person to one that is economically poor and small, serve on the Reserve Bank board. such as East Timor, it is doubly difficult. We

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 81 recognise that. It is a neighbour. It is in need homes? Can the minister confirm that the of support, and our government will continue Minister for Ageing has stated that any facil- to support it. I need only reflect upon my ity that does not meet the government’s 1999 own portfolio. It is the ADF that is helping aged care certification standards with a fire the small East Timorese defence force estab- safety requirement will have their certifica- lish itself with training. I recall that only last tion reviewed? Given the 31 December 2005 night I signed another brief to provide further deadline for compliance with this standard, support for the fledgling East Timorese de- will those certification reviews take place fence force. The same principle applies early in 2006? How will residents know if across the portfolio areas in relation to East their facility has not met the fire safety stan- Timor. So, in relation to the specific grants of dard? Will providers be sanctioned for not which Senator Brown is speaking, I will seek having complied with the standard, which an answer. But, in general, I can assure him was introduced six years ago? And what will that Australia stands behind East Timor, will the sanction be? support it and recognises the challenges it Senator PATTERSON—I thank the hon- faces, and that East Timor will find no better ourable senator for her question. I would like friend than this country. to remind the chamber that Professor Greg- Senator BOB BROWN—Mr President, I ory wrote a report in 1994—18 months be- ask a supplementary question. At the time of fore Labor left office. I remind people that this savage take-back of the money from the 13 per cent of nursing homes failed to meet East Timorese groups by AusAID as directed the relevant fire authority standards; 11 per by the minister, I ask the minister: what is cent of nursing homes did not meet the rele- the point of this puerile, pointless pencil dis- vant health authority standards; 70 per cent tributed from AusAID today to recognise the of them did not meet relevant outcome stan- 12 million people living with AIDS in the dards; and 51 per cent of nursing home resi- South-East Asian region? Would it not have dents were living in rooms with three or been much better to have spent this money more beds. on the purchase of condoms or, indeed, on Senator Carr—You have had 11 years to directly fighting the scourge of AIDS in our fix it. north instead of this self-promotion by the Senator PATTERSON—I heard a com- government in this pointless fashion? ment from the other side that we have had 10 The PRESIDENT—That sounds to me years to fix it. Let me just say that Mrs like another question. Minister, I do not be- Bishop, the then Minister for Aged Care, lieve you have to answer it if you don’t want closed over 200 nursing homes that needed to. to be closed and which should have been Nursing Home Safety Standards closed under Labor—200 nursing homes that Senator McLUCAS (2.54 pm)—My failed to meet standards. They were appall- question is to Senator Patterson, representing ing. You would not have wanted to put your the Minister for Ageing. Is the minister dog in some of those nursing homes. So let’s aware of the fire in a Melbourne residential not talk about standards; let us talk about aged care facility on the weekend—where, what we have done in terms of nursing thankfully, all residents were evacuated homes— safely—which highlights the need to enforce Senator Chris Evans—Mr President, I stringent fire safety standards in nursing rise on a point of order: it goes to relevance.

CHAMBER 82 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

The minister was asked a very serious ques- larations were received from all homes for tion about her own government’s policy and the calendar year 2004, and about eight per a looming deadline relating to fire standards cent of homes indicated they were not fully in this country’s nursing homes. Her raving compliant with relevant state and local gov- on about what happened 10 years ago is not ernment laws. These declarations were re- attempting to answer the question. Senator ferred to the relevant state or local govern- McLucas genuinely wants an answer as to ment authority for follow-up action. what the government is going to do, and I Building certification is mandatory for think you ought to draw the minister’s atten- approved providers of aged care to be able to tion to the question and ask her to answer it. charge accommodation bonds and charges or The PRESIDENT—Senator, as you to receive the government’s concessional know, there is a practice in this place of long resident supplement. Approved providers are preambles to answers, and I believe the min- expected to ensure that aged care buildings ister was in order to make some comments meet additional fire safety targets by the end about nursing homes, which the question was of 2005, and evidence of this must be pro- about. She has two minutes and 45 seconds vided to the department by 31 December to complete her answer, and I remind her of 2005. Privacy and space targets must also be the question. met by 2008, as required under the 10-year Senator PATTERSON—Labor does not forward plan for residential aged care build- want to be reminded about some of those ing certification. The Australian government nursing homes but, as a backbencher in op- has provided support to the aged care indus- position, I went around to those nursing try through a one-off capital payment of homes, and they were disgraceful. Every $513 million, or $3,500 per resident, under Labor member should have hung their head the Investing in Australia’s Aged Care: More in shame, because they failed to meet a num- Places, Better Care package. A payment of ber of the standards, including the fire stan- $3,500 per resident was made to approved dard. But while building standards, including providers in June 2004 in recognition of the fire safety standards, are the responsibility of forward plan for improved building stan- the relevant state, territory or local govern- dards for aged care homes developed and ment authority, the Australian government agreed with the aged care sector, and, in par- operates a building certification program ticular, for improved fire safety. which aims to raise the quality of residential As part of the annual fire safety declara- aged care buildings. As of 30 June 2004, the tions, approved providers are required to estimated total work in progress for new re- show how the one-off payment has been ap- building works was $1,214 million. plied. Providers will also be required to pro- Approved providers must meet their obli- vide evidence to the Department of Health gations under the relevant state and local and Ageing of an assessment of the aged care government laws. To ensure that aged care home against the 1999 certification assess- homes are meeting fire standards, the Austra- ment instrument by a professional approved lian government requires approved providers by the department to undertake such inspec- to submit an annual fire safety declaration tions, which shows that the home scores at which states that they have complied with all least 19 out of 25 for fire safety and 60 out of state, territory and local government fire 100 overall. If such evidence is not provided safety laws in the previous 12 months. Dec- by December 2005, this may result in a review of the home certification under the

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 83

Aged Care Act. We have done a lot more Senator Hill—Mr President, I ask that than Labor even contemplated doing and further questions be placed on the Notice have cleaned up nursing homes, which were Paper. left in a disgraceful state by Labor. (Time QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: expired) ADDITIONAL ANSWERS Senator McLUCAS—Mr President, I ask Genetically Modified Food a supplementary question. Can the minister Senator PATTERSON (Victoria— confirm that the department’s web site cur- Minister for Family and Community Ser- rently shows that over 1,300 aged care facili- vices and Minister Assisting the Prime Min- ties—that is almost half, almost 50 per cent, ister for Women’s Issues) (3.01 pm)— of all facilities—have not demonstrated Yesterday I was asked a question about aller- compliance with the new fire safety stan- gic reactions in mice to a genetically engi- dard? Why is it that just one month away neered field pea developed by the CSIRO. I from the deadline for compliance the only have a very long answer here. I am happy to public announcement from the minister on read it but, to assist the progress of the Sen- this issue has been a short letter to the editor ate, I will seek leave to incorporate the an- in the Herald Sun? Don’t residents and pro- swer in Hansard. viders deserve some certainty over what will happen on 1 January 2006 to the tens of Leave granted. thousands of residents who may occupy beds The answer read as follows— in facilities that do not meet the fire safety SENATOR SIEWERT—My question is directed standards? Minister, if you do not know the to Senator Patterson, representing the Minister for answer to these questions, will you take them Health and Ageing. on notice, particularly the issue that I raised Is the Minister aware of the recently published in my first question—that is, how will the research by the Australian National University residents know if their facility has not met that showed an allergic reaction in mice to a ge- the fire safety standard and will providers be netically engineered field pea developed by the sanctioned? CSIRO? Can the Minister outline what similar independent published scientific research is un- Senator PATTERSON—That was a very dertaken by the Office of the Gene Technology long supplementary question for a one- Regulator and Food Standards Australia New minute answer. Let me just say that they will Zealand to assess the health risks to the general know that they are better protected than they public posed by the existing commercialised ge- ever were under Labor, when, as Professor netically engineered foods on sale in Australia Gregory’s report indicated, aged care facili- today? ties did not meet required standards. We have Is the Minister aware of the announcement yes- put in millions of dollars to do that. I do not terday by the WA Minister of Agriculture that WA always take what Senator McLucas says as will fund independent scientific research into the gospel because often it is a misrepresentation health risks of existing GE foods on the market? of the facts but I will pass on what she said Will the Minister commit the Commonwealth through the OGTR, the FSANZ and other inde- to the Minister for Ageing and ask the minis- pendent bodies to conduct similar research in an ter, if she has got any more details, to give expedient manner to ensure the safety of the Aus- them to me to present to the Senate. tralian public?

CHAMBER 84 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

SENATOR PATTERSON—The Minister for Risk Analysis Framework using the Australia- Health and Ageing has provided the following New Zealand Standard on Risk Management that answer to the honourable Senator’s question: is recognised as best practice internationally. FSANZ and the OGTR are regulatory agencies. In relation to the study in mice published by the In common with other such agencies, they do not ANU, at present there is no single test that can be undertake or conduct research, they evaluate ap- used to determine if a new protein is likely to be plications. The data required to support applica- allergenic to humans. The internationally actions are extensive and include studies like those cepted approach, which has been elaborated by referred to by the Senator. The evaluation process the Codex Alimentarius Commission, FAO and is intensive and includes a critical assessment of WHO and followed by FSANZ, is to use a variety the supporting data in the context of the relevant of data and information, which when considered international literature. together can be used to reach a conclusion about All genetically modified, or GM, foods included potential allergenicity of a new protein in food. in the Food Standards Code have undergone a The OGTR adopts a similar approach in evaluat- rigorous pre-market safety assessment conducted ing non-food human health risks, as well as po- by FSANZ in accordance with internationally tential adverse impacts for other organisms in its accepted standards. Inclusion in the Food Stan- environmental assessments. dards Code is approved by the Food Standards The various animal models that are available are Ministerial Council, which consists of the Com- not considered to be sufficiently well developed monwealth and State Governments and New Zea- or validated to use at the present time in this con- land. text. This also applies to the mouse model used in All genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, the ANU study. While the study in mice appears licensed for environmental release by the Gene to have been very carefully planned, conducted Technology Regulator have undergone a thorough and reported, the animal model used has not been evaluation, involving the preparation of a com- validated to predict human immune or allergic prehensive Risk Assessment and Risk Manage- responses to food. CSIRO has also emphasised ment Plan and extensive consultation with a range this point that no conclusions could be drawn of expert authorities and key stakeholders, includ- about whether actual harm to humans would oc- ing State Governments and the public. cur if the GM peas were consumed by people. CSIRO’s decision to end the research reflects a Neither FSANZ nor the Gene Technology Regu- cautious approach and the ANU test data were lator would issue approvals if they were not satis- never submitted to regulatory authorities. fied that sufficient, scientifically credible data were available to support the decision. Nevertheless, the research was conducted in an- ticipation of applying for regulatory approvals. Approvals of GM foods for human consumption The findings demonstrate the importance of case- by FSANZ are based on comprehensive, rigorous by-case evaluation of GMOs and GM products, and science-based safety assessments that follow and the effective role science-based decision- international best practice and guidelines devel- making can play in ensuring the safe introduction oped by the Food and Agricultural Organisation of GM foods to the food supply or release of GM of the United Nations (FAO), World Health Or- crops into the environment. ganisation (WHO), Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and Co- The research announced by the WA Minister for dex Alimentarius Commission. These interna- Agriculture appears to comprise long term animal tional guidelines have been adopted by food regu- feeding experiments with GM food. This type of lators worldwide, including in the US, Canada, study is not considered to be as useful as other Japan, Europe and many other countries. currently accepted methodologies as there are significant problems in interpreting the results Assessments of GMOs for release into the envi- from a scientific perspective. For example, effects ronment by the Gene Technology Regulator are unrelated to introduced GM proteins are known to equally rigorous and science-based and follow a arise where the food being tested is not part of the

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 85 normal diet of the animals. Such effects can be was initiated in South Australia by the tax compounded by the animals being required to office against Gerard Industries. In its com- consume large amounts of the food because the plaint about significant underpayment of tax level of GM protein expression is usually ex- involving up to $150 million, the tax office tremely low. found that Mr Gerard, as the chief executive FSANZ and OGTR continue to monitor new sci- officer of Gerard Industries, personally had entific information and testing methodologies as made false and misleading statements about they become available. Where appropriate, they tax minimisation schemes that he had will take this into account and modify data requirements for the conduct of safety assessments knowledge of and authorised the operation of to ensure the continued safety of the Australian in a number of Caribbean islands. That was community and environment. known prior to Mr Gerard’s appointment to QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: the Reserve Bank board. It was known by Mr TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS Costello, the Treasurer, prior to the appointing of Mr Gerard to the Reserve Bank board. Mr Robert Gerard With regard to the issue which Mr Senator SHERRY (Tasmania) (3.02 Costello—an arrogant Mr Costello, I might pm)—I move: say—does not address but which he uses to That the Senate take note of the answer given mislead the Australian parliament and the by the Minister for Finance and Administration Australian people, Mr Costello claims that he (Senator Minchin) to a question without notice received notification from the tax office that asked by Senator Sherry today relating to the appointment of Mr Robert Gerard to the Board of there was no personal question mark over the the Reserve Bank of Australia. personal tax affairs of Mr Gerard. That is not the issue. The issue here is the activities The Australian Reserve Bank board is the found by the ATO about Mr Gerard in his custodian of the Australian monetary system. capacity as the chief executive officer of As such, it has a very important position in Gerard Industries, which included, as I have the Australian economy. Rightly, the Reserve said, tax minimisation schemes located in Bank board has a code of conduct which islands in the Caribbean and false and mis- provides guidelines for the behaviour of in- leading statements about those tax minimisa- dividuals who are members of the Reserve tion schemes by Mr Gerard personally. That Bank board. The code of conduct says: is what the tax office found prior to Mr Members shall observe the highest possible stan- Gerard’s appointment to the Reserve Bank dards of ethical conduct. They will avoid any board. action, or inaction, which could in any way im- pair the Bank’s capacity to carry out its duties, or Only the arrogant Treasurer of this coun- compromise its standing in the community and its try, Mr Costello, could possibly claim that a reputation for integrity, fairness, honesty and in- person with that record and that finding by dependence. the tax office could be appointed to the Re- That is the conduct expected of members of serve Bank board. Only someone with the the Reserve Bank board. What do we have at arrogance of the Treasurer, Mr Costello, the present time? A member of the Reserve could expect the public to believe that a per- Bank board, a Mr Gerard, appointed by the son such as Mr Gerard, with those findings Treasurer, Mr Costello. Mr Gerard was the against him by the tax office, could then be CEO, the chief executive officer, of Gerard appointed to the Reserve Bank board. The Industries. Prior to Mr Gerard’s appointment Reserve Bank board rightly has a code of to the Reserve Bank board, a court action conduct. It has a very important position in

CHAMBER 86 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 the Australian financial and economic sys- tralian institutions. He sponsors the Clipsal tem. Yet, the Treasurer goes ahead and ap- 500 motor vehicle race, the Adelaide Crows points this individual as a member of the football club, the North Adelaide football Reserve Bank board. club, Prince Alfred College and many other Why did he do it? We posed questions to community organisations. He is a very gen- Senator Minchin today. Our information is erous and well known benefactor of a wide that Senator Minchin warned the Treasurer range of South Australian community institu- not to appoint him. So why did the arrogant tions. Yet the Labor Party simply want to Treasurer go ahead and appoint this person embark on this character assassination. to the Reserve Bank board? Well, he gave Senator Kemp interjecting— over a million dollars in donations to the Senator Webber interjecting— Liberal Party. Perhaps that is why the Treas- The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Senator urer appointed Mr Gerard to the Reserve Kemp and Senator Webber, I am trying to Bank board. He gave over a million dollars; listen to Senator Chapman. He is entitled to that is on the public record. After all, he was be heard in silence. Your exchange across the a member of the Liberal Party. What this chamber makes it very difficult indeed. shows is an incredible arrogance by this government, and particularly by the Treasurer, Senator CHAPMAN—The fact is that Mr Costello, that a person with this record in this issue of tax assessments and the claims public, with findings by the ATO, could be of the Australian Taxation Office are nothing appointed to the Reserve Bank board. (Time more than allegations made by the tax office. expired) That is very clear from what has already been said on this matter. It has been made Senator CHAPMAN (South Australia) very clear in the statement issued by Mr (3.07 pm)—What we see writ large in this Gerard yesterday that these were allegations issue that the Labor Party have raised in made by the tax office. As the Treasurer and question time in both this chamber and the the Prime Minister have said, taxpayers are other place and also in this debate is the old entitled to dispute claims made by the Aus- Labor Party politics of envy. It is nothing tralian tax office and they are entitled to dis- more or less than that. The real gripe of the pute assessments made by the tax office Labor Party is that, unlike some business- through the court system that we have. That people, Mr Robert Gerard is prepared to is exactly what Gerard Industries was doing wear his heart on his sleeve when it comes to in this situation. The matter was settled out politics. He is known as a major and gener- of court; there was no finding against Gerard ous donor to the Liberal Party and, unlike Industries or Mr Gerard. The allegations that others, he does not have a two-bob each way the Labor Party are putting up on this issue bet. He makes his support known and he have absolutely no substance whatsoever. generously supports the Liberal Party and does not support this ratbag mob on the other That is the clear point with regard to this side. That is what the Labor Party’s gripe is issue. Mr Gerard is a person of eminent all about. character. He is a very successful South Aus- tralian businessman and, indeed, in the Aus- What the Labor Party ignore in their at- tralian context probably a leading Australian tempted character assassination of Mr Gerard businessman. He grew and developed a small is that he is also a very well known and gen- family business into a successful Australian erous benefactor of a lot of other South Aus- based international company with invest-

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 87 ments and production facilities both in Aus- Liberal Party is loyal to its friends and re- tralia and overseas and with overseas busi- wards them well. Rob Gerard has been a ness partners. He has developed Australian consistent source of funding for the Liberal exports of electrical goods and he has played Party. Rob Gerard supported Dean Brown a leading role as a policy maker for Austra- and the Liberal Party in the lead-up to the lian industry through the South Australian December 1993 election. Indeed, Mike Rann business chamber and also the Australian said once that Gerard Industries authorised Chamber of Commerce and Industry. He has and printed most of the Liberal Party’s cam- made an enormous contribution not only to paign literature in the lead-up to the 1993 the South Australian community but also to election, and provided strong support to the the Australian community as a whole. Liberal Party. It did not take him long to get To suggest, as the Labor Party does, that his reward for that. because of a dispute—and it can be put at After the December 1993 election, in nothing more than that—with the Australian 1994 his company, Clipsal Industries, was Taxation Office over tax matters, a dispute the recipient of a $2.5 million factory built that was resolved satisfactorily, he should not for him in Strathalbyn by the South Austra- be serving on the Reserve Bank board is lian Housing Trust. That is right: the South simply absolute nonsense. As I said, the real Australian Housing Trust built a factory for gripe of the Labor Party on this matter is the Clipsal Industries in Strathalbyn. They also politics of envy—that here is a man who provided the water supply and gave payroll supports his political principles very strongly tax deductions to that factory. Like many and has been actively involved in the Liberal South Australian Liberal government indus- Party as well as being a substantial financial try assistance schemes, this one did not work supporter of the party and does not, of and the factory failed. So the provision of course, support the Labor Party in any way, jobs out there did not work. Not content with shape or form. that, the Liberal Party have assisted Rob That is the real gripe of the Labor Party on Gerard in other ways. this issue. That is why they are attempting The then Premier Dean Brown said, in re- this character assassination of Mr Gerard and sponse to some issues raised on this matter in it is nothing more or less than that. As I said, the South Australian parliament and talking Mr Gerard is a generous benefactor not only about Mike Rann: for the Liberal Party but also for the whole ... he wants the people of South Australia to be- South Australian community, which would lieve that any financial donations to the Liberal be much the poorer if it did not have a per- Party somehow are rotten and associated with son like Mr Robert Gerard with the contribu- attempts to influence the government to favour tion that he has made to the state not only in the donors. business but also as a benefactor for many The Liberal Party certainly has favoured this South Australian institutions. I suggest that particular donor in this instance with the ap- the Labor Party forget this issue. It is show- pointment to the Reserve Bank of Australia, ing them up purely as a party of envy and a position of power and influence and very there is nothing to sustain the case they are adequate remuneration. That appointment putting on this matter. was a reward for favours done for the Liberal Senator HURLEY (South Australia) Party. Rob Gerard has been more successful (3.12 pm)—At least you can say that the in his political activities than his commercial activities in some respects. Maybe the Lib-

CHAMBER 88 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 eral Party in South Australia should get back arrogance of former Prime Minister Paul Rob Gerard to print and authorise their mate- Keating when he claimed to have the Re- rial and to involve himself in Liberal Party serve Bank board in his back pocket. Was dealings in South Australia because, cer- that arrogance or wasn’t it? All that the tainly since he left the active political sphere, Treasurer has done in the past couple of days the Liberal Party in South Australia has gone is explain to the Australian people the exact downhill all the way, and it now looks in a circumstances at the time of the appointment very poor position in the lead-up to the next of Rob Gerard to the Reserve Bank. election. Rob Gerard is a fine South Australian. Perhaps it is good for the Labor Party that During my time as president of the Liberal Rob Gerard stays on the board of the Re- Party in South Australia Rob Gerard was the serve Bank of Australia. We would not want vice president, so I worked very closely with him back in South Australia running the Lib- him over a period of time. I know that one eral Party again. Mike Rann calls the Liberal thing that Rob Gerard is very proud to do is Party a Rob Gerard franchise. I think it is let everybody know that he is a Liberal Party unfortunate for the Liberal Party that Rob supporter. Unlike many other businessmen Gerard’s active involvement has ceased, be- who want to have two bob each way, as cause that was when they were at their most Senator Chapman has said, he does not ap- successful. Perhaps they would like him prove of the policies of the Labor Party in back. any form whatsoever and is prepared to nail You can understand now why the Liberal his colours to the mast and say: ‘I am going Party might be looking at a roll back in the to give to the Liberal Party because they disclosure of political donations. They are have a philosophy that I believe in. I am go- embarrassed time and time again by the way ing to support them. I proudly say so and I that they reward their faithful friends and know that it’ll come out in the paper. I know significant donors in this respect. The dona- that the money that I give will be publicly tion of $1.1 million from Rob Gerard is very disclosed.’ That does not stop Rob Gerard significant and it has had its own very sig- being a wonderful supporter of the Liberal nificant reward. The government’s reaction is Party in South Australia. indicative of the cavalier way that they treat Senator Sherry went on to say, ‘I have in- any criticism. They believe that they can do formation that Senator Minchin warned the no wrong at this stage. I think they will find, Treasurer.’ What rot. Where does Senator like the Liberal government in South Austra- Sherry get all of his rumours from? I do not lia found in 1997 and then in 2002, that the know. I imagine that he makes them up. Here public do not appreciate that kind of arrogant you have a man who, as has been reported in behaviour. the paper, has given $1 million to the Liberal Senator FERGUSON (South Australia) Party, a party whose philosophy he believes (3.17 pm)—I was very interested to hear in and that he wants to see in government. what Senator Sherry had to say in his usual For that reason he has been a generous do- prepared statement in taking note of the an- nor. swer of Senator Minchin. It was very inter- When they were talking about the $1 mil- esting to hear Senator Sherry talk about the lion that Mr Gerard has given to the Liberal arrogance of Mr Costello. I wonder whether Party, I did not hear the Labor Party say any- he would have said the same thing about the thing about the $36 million of taxpayers’

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 89 money that they rorted from Centenary himself, in his own written statement, said he House for their own benefit—$36 million had never made any secret of the fact that at over and above what would be the normal the time of his appointment his companies rates charged for rent for this place in Can- were involved in a dispute with the ATO. berra. They said nothing about the $36 mil- There was no trying to hide the facts. He lion that they got from the taxpayers to put made it quite clear at that time. He is a fine into their own coffers and use for their own South Australian. (Time expired) political ends. Senator McEWEN (South Australia) Rob Gerard, as my colleague Senator (3.22 pm)—I also rise in the debate on the Chapman has already said, is a fine South motion to take note of the answer by Senator Australian who has given money to many Minchin, the Minister for Finance and Ad- worthy causes in South Australia. He does ministration and the Minister representing not give it to unworthy causes, which is why the Treasurer in the Senate, about the ap- he does not give it to the Labor Party. He has pointment of Mr Gerard to a directorship of given a lot of money to charity and to a lot of the Reserve Bank board. The appointment wonderful organisations. He is highly re- was made when companies associated with spected and has been recognised with Aus- Mr Gerard were in the midst of a 14-year tralian honours for his contributions both to long battle with the Australian Taxation Of- the South Australian community and to many fice over tax avoidance to the tune of $150 organisations within South Australia and million; tax avoidance that the Treasurer within Australia. He is eminently suited, with must have known about and apparently his experience, to be a member of the Re- thought was not a problem and should not be serve Bank board. a hindrance to the appointment of Mr Gerard I reiterate what the Treasurer said yester- to the Reserve Bank board. On this side of day on the AM program to Catherine the house, we thought we had seen it all in McGrath. He said that he asked whether the terms of arrogance on the part of this gov- commissioner could give him an assurance ernment, but this effort by the Treasurer cer- that the nomination should go forward and tainly takes government arrogance to new the commissioner said that it could. So a lot heights. Senator Minchin’s refusal to answer of the furphies that have been put around in the question from Senator Sherry about this the last couple of days—in particular by Mr is illustrative of the arrogance of the gov- Swan in the other place and here again by ernment and the way it flies in the face of Senator Sherry today—about the things that what is decent and proper in the Australian actually took place at that time give lie to the community and indicative of the low regard facts. Senator Sherry, let me remind you that it has for the people of Australia. the Treasurer said yesterday that the Com- This appointment to the board of the Re- missioner of Taxation, who is responsible for serve Bank of Australia involves the biggest the taxation system, said to him there were South Australian Liberal mate ever—a Lib- no current disputes. That was the word of the eral mate who donated to the tune of $1.1 Commissioner of Taxation. The commis- million to the Liberal Party. As Senator Hur- sioner could have gone on to say, ‘Well, by ley noted, the Premier of South Australia the way, I have these allegations about Mr appropriately called the Liberal Party a Rob Gerard,’ but he did not say that. He did not Gerard franchise. This is an appointment of a raise any objections to the appointment of man whose company had to pay $150 mil- Mr Gerard at all. In conclusion, Mr Gerard lion to settle a dispute with the tax office

CHAMBER 90 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 over tax avoidance. He is a Liberal mate who different matter, and the government’s at- the Treasurer called a fit and proper person tempt to justify the appointment is woeful. to be on the Reserve Bank board. Doesn’t Surely, a person appointed to the Reserve this government have any shame? Doesn’t it Bank board must have the complete trust and have any respect at all for the people of Aus- confidence of all Australians. This is the tralia? We know it doesn’t and we have seen bank that sets things like interest rates that it time and time again here in this chamber. affect every Australian every day of their If it did, it would not be lumbering the peo- lives. But the Treasurer knew that Mr Gerard ple of Australia with the draconian work- was in strife. He was in a big blue with the place relations laws that we are currently tax office when he was appointed. The debating in this place. It would not be lum- Treasurer stared down Senator Minchin and bering the disabled people and the single others who allegedly had some doubts, le- supporting parents of Australia with so- gitimately, about the appointment of Mr called Welfare to Work reforms—reforms Gerard. The government, through that prime which will drive them into poverty. We know ministerial wannabe, the Treasurer, Mr it does not respect Australians. Costello, has failed to observe the highest It would be interesting to hear what Mr standards of corporate governance. (Time Gerard thinks about the workplace relations expired) laws currently being debated in this place. Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (3.27 Interestingly, Mr Gerard, as we know—and pm)—I actually do not know Mr Gerard at has been said by many senators opposite, all, and prior to this recent controversy I especially South Australian senators—is a knew very little about him. So I am actually very successful South Australian business- not going to comment on him in any direct man. I know he has won gongs for his busi- way, but I do want to comment on the issue ness acumen and also for his contribution to that arises. This whole controversy high- the South Australian community. The com- lights, as clearly as anything, the very des- panies that Mr Gerard has been involved in perate need in Australia to ensure that these have done very well, despite the fact the sorts of major and key appointments to cru- government says we need to radically over- cial public positions are done openly and haul our industrial relations system because transparently and via a process of merit. it is holding back entrepreneurial employers Senators would know that the Democrats like Mr Gerard. But Mr Gerard seems to have moved amendments more than 20 have done okay. He has done well enough, in times, I think, to various pieces of legislation fact, in business under the current industrial over the years trying to ensure that such a relations laws—and indeed under Labor in- process of appointment on merit via an open dustrial relations laws—to contribute more and transparent process is used for these than $1 million to the Liberal Party in South sorts of important public appointments. Australia. We all know that whilst there is a contro- I do not dispute that Mr Gerard is a good versy this time about this particular appoint- businessman. We do not dispute that people ment and the circumstances surrounding it— have the right to seek to legitimately avoid and there are some legitimate questions to be paying tax under current taxation laws. But asked, let me hasten to add, and answered, what we do dispute is whether the govern- even better—this of course is not the first ment should have appointed Mr Gerard to controversy, even about appointments to the the Reserve Bank board. That is altogether a Reserve Bank board, let alone other ap-

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 91 pointments to the High Court, the board of as we have seen from the government in re- Telstra and a whole range of other key posi- lation to this incident. This is a lesson that tions in the public arena. It stems back to that Senator Abetz in particular has well learnt. core problem that we do not have a transpar- We are talking about answers in question ent process; therefore, the natural response of time in this debate and I think that Senator people when circumstances like this arise is Abetz has consistently, for the last month at to suspect something dubious is going on. least, covered up the basics and obscured a From the facts of this matter, such as are fundamental truth about the government’s in the public arena and which we have just welfare changes through bluster, half-truths heard outlined by other speakers, it is only and the deliberate misleading of the public reasonable for the average person to very about the fundamental core of what the gov- seriously query whether or not there is some- ernment is trying to do. thing untoward here. We are talking about The fundamental fact has been put to something as fundamental as the Reserve Senator Abetz many times over in questions: Bank. As we all know, and as has been is it not the case that the government’s legis- widely commented, the future direction of lation on welfare will dramatically reduce interest rates was a crucial factor in the last the income of over 100,000 sole parents and election campaign and something that is very people with disabilities? That simple fact is heavily of interest to large numbers of Aus- something that the minister has dodged every tralians. For people to think that these sorts single time, in question after question. He of positions might be influenced by politi- cannot confront it head on because it is a cally partisan interests is very serious. It de- simple, unpalatable truth that the government grades the political process. Labor might wish to hide behind a range of bluster, insults score points against the Liberals at this mo- and smear of anybody that questions them. ment, but it degrades all of us. It degrades That sort of approach of smearing and slag- the political process and democracy more ging off anyone who queries the government broadly. It is no different from the political and criticises their approach is one that un- points that the Liberals sought to score fortunately is becoming much more com- against Labor with some of their appoint- mon. Senator Abetz, unfortunately, as we ments when Labor was in government—or have seen in his feeble defence in the work- which they have sought to do quite recently place relations arena— with particular appointments of various gov- Senator Kemp—Mr Deputy President, I ernments at state level in my own state of rise on a point of order. The debate is not Queensland and elsewhere. about Senator Abetz, who is doing an abso- We have to get a better process. Until we lutely outstanding job in question time deal- do that, we will continue to have these sorts ing with the questions which are put to him; of controversies, some of them with very it is about another issue. If it were about legitimate suspicions but that degrade the Senator Abetz, he should have been told so reputation of the political process. It also that he could come in and make his own puts at risk the very important reputation of points. It is quite cowardly, actually, to stand bodies like the Reserve Bank. It is about up at this time and attack a colleague without openness, honesty and transparency in these warning him that this is about to occur. sorts of processes rather than just trying to The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—There is obscure the facts every time there is a con- no point of order. I draw your attention to the troversy through bluster and half-truths, such

CHAMBER 92 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 motion before the chair, Senator Bartlett. ... banned all pharmaceutical sales of abortion pill You have eight seconds left. RU-486, citing safety concerns about the drug. ‘In order to guarantee patients’ safety and protect Senator BARTLETT—Under standing their health, it is decided that no matter whether order 193, I ask for Senator Kemp to with- patients have a doctor’s prescription or not, retail draw that reflection on my motivation. drug stores are forbidden to sell mifepristone The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Senator (RU-486) tablets. Bartlett, your time has expired. The question This was according to a notice from China’s is— state drug administration reported by the in- Senator Bartlett—Mr Deputy President, I ternational news agencies. The columnist stand on a point of order. As I said, Senator also accused me of not informing myself by Kemp called me cowardly for simply re- not attending the pro-abortion drug briefing sponding and I think— in Parliament House. Contrary to what was The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—I did not said in the article, I have informed myself. I take it that you were taking a point of order; have looked up the drug manufacturer’s own I took it that you were completing the rest of warnings in Danco’s new Medication Guide your contribution to the debate. and it states: About 5-8 out of 100 women taking Mifeprex Senator Bartlett—On a point of order: will need a surgical procedure to end the preg- Senator Kemp has stated that I am cowardly nancy or to stop too much bleeding. for pointing out the facts about Senator … … … Abetz’s answers in this debate on taking note of answers. I think that is a reflection on my Some women should not take Mifeprex. Do not motivation and I ask him to withdraw that. take it if: The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—There is … … … no point of order. • You cannot return for the next 2 visits. Question agreed to. • You cannot easily get emergency medical help in the 2 weeks after you take Mifeprex. PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS I have also listened to Professor Renate Senator BOSWELL (Queensland— Klein, a pro-choice professor in women’s Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) (3.34 studies at Deakin University. She pointed out pm)—I claim to have been misrepresented that RU486 is an unpredictable drug cocktail and I seek leave to make a short statement. which starves the foetus of nourishment, re- Leave granted. quires two or three visits to a doctor with Senator BOSWELL—Today in a column ultrasound facilities and that it is a protracted in the Daily Telegraph, Anita Quigley calls process because the woman is walking me ill-informed for saying that the abortion around having an abortion for two to three drug RU486 was banned in China. She rang weeks. In other words, we have come the full my office to see what abortion drug meetings circle—back to backyard abortions, where I had attended, but did not ask to speak to me the woman is left to have an abortion alone about the issues. Instead, she contacted a and at home and, if something goes wrong, multinational abortion corporation. When I as it does in at least five to eight per cent of wanted the facts, I went to a doctor who the cases that need backup surgery, the pointed out the web site with the news report woman must be able to access emergency that stated that China has: care. The columnist accuses me of hiding behind flimsy medical claims—

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 93

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Senator they have no doctor standing by, if they take Boswell, you are now debating the issue. only the first pill then change their mind and You asked for a point of personal explana- do not take the next or if they have an ec- tion— topic pregnancy, they could be in terrible Senator BOSWELL—No, I did not. trouble. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—You are This is a drug combo that relies on more into your fourth page. than one visit to the doctor and two ultra- sounds to be taken properly. Once RU486 is Senator BOSWELL—I asked to make a allowed in, a black market in it will take short statement. hold, as it has in China. I believe these are The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—You the important facts in the debate and I en- claimed to have been misrepresented. courage others, like the writer of this col- Senator BOSWELL—Yes, I did, and I umn, to check them out. asked to make a statement. I am still making PETITIONS the statement. The Clerk—Petitions have been lodged The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—All right. for presentation as follows: Continue. Workplace Relations Senator BOSWELL—Thank you. I re- To the Honourable the President and Members of peat: if something goes wrong, as it does in Senate assembled in Parliament at least five to eight per cent of the cases— We, the undersigned people of goodwill, draw to The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Your the attention of the Senate our grave concerns statement must refer to where you have been about the direction that the Government is taking misrepresented. our nation with its comprehensive changes to the Senator BOSWELL—I am making a Workplace and Industrial Relations System. statement. I did not seek to make a personal Your petitioners therefore pray that the Senate explanation. refer all relevant legislation to a comprehensive Senate Inquiry and Review process that: Senator Webber—Yes, you did. • investigates the impact of the changes on and The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Senator safeguards the rights of the most vulnerable Webber, keep out of this. workers and their families: low-income, part- Senator BOSWELL—No, I did not. I time and casual workers and especially out- asked to make a statement, and I have about workers one minute to go. The women must be able • upholds the right of workers to bargain col- to access emergency care. The columnist lectively and the right of unions to act as their agents accused me of hiding behind flimsy medical claims, yet I mostly used the medical advice • accepts and hears submissions from all inter- issued by the FDA, which the columnist her- ested stakeholders in all states and territories self quotes. • enquires into the constitutional underpinnings of the proposed legislation Once a drug is approved in Australia there • will be no way to prevent it being readily upholds the principles of fairness and balance for workers and their families in its de- available on the internet. There will be no liberations and decisions. way to stop its use by women young and old, city and rural, black and white. If they are by Senator Moore (from 5,055 citizens). uninformed of how to take the medication, if

CHAMBER 94 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Same-Sex Relationships by Senator Wortley (from 1,258 citi- This petition is addressed to the Australian Sen- zens). ate. We are seeking changes to the Marriage Act Petitions received. (1961) to alter the definition of marriage from “the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion NOTICES of all others, voluntarily entered into for life” to Presentation include recognition of same sex couples. Senator Ludwig to move on the next day by Senator Nettle (from 4,545 citizens). of sitting: Workplace Relations That item 2 [Division 1.4E—Sponsorship: To the Honourable President of the Senate and trade skills training (incorporating Subdivisions Members of the Senate assembled in Parliament: 1.4E.1 to 1.4E.4)] of Schedule 7 of the Migration Amendment Regulations 2005 (No. 9), as con- The petition of certain citizens of Australia draws tained in Select Legislative Instrument 2005 No. the attention of the Senate to the fact that Austra- 240 and made under the Migration Act 1958, be lian employees will be worse off as a result of the disallowed. Howard Government’s proposed changes to the industrial relations system. Senator Allison to move on the next day The petitioners call upon the Howard Govern- of sitting: ment to adopt a plan to produce a fair industrial That the Senate— relations system based on fairness and the funda- (a) notes that: mental principles of minimum standards, wages (i) the Sea Shepherd Conservation Soci- and conditions; safety nets; an independent um- ety’s ship the Farley Mowat will leave pire; the right to associate; and the right to collec- Melbourne in early December 2005 on tively bargain. its way to Antarctica to stop Japanese The Petitioners therefore ask the Senate to ensure whalers from slaughtering whales in that the Howard Government: Australian waters in the Antarctic (1) Guarantees that no individual Australia em- Whale Sanctuary, ployee will be worse off under proposed (ii) Japan plans to double its kill of minke changes to the industrial relation system. whales and target, for the first time in 2 (2) Allows the National Minimum Wage to con- decades, the endangered humpback tinue to be set annually by the independent whale and fin whale, umpire, the Australian Industrial Relations (iii) the Government charged the Farley Commission. Mowat $800 when it docked in Mel- (3) Guarantees that unfair dismissal law changes bourne, arguing that it was a commer- will not enable employers to unfairly sack cial vessel, despite the absence of employees. cargo, and (4) Ensures that workers have the right to reject (iv) the Department of Immigration and individual contracts and bargain for decent Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs wages and conditions collectively. threatened to impose a $5 000 fine on (5) Keeps in place safety nets for minimum one of the crew of the Farley Mowat wages and conditions. for not having a visa, despite the fact that she had already been granted one; (6) Adopt Federal Labor’s principles to produce a fair system based on the fundamental prin- (b) questions why the Government has been ciples on minimum standards, wages and so antagonistic to the Farley Mowat and conditions; safety nets; an independent um- why it did not itself send vessels to inter- pire; the right to associate; and the right to vene in this kill; collectively bargain.

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 95

(c) urges the Government to return the $800 munity organisations and public compa- erroneous charge imposed on the Farley nies; and Mowat; and (d) expresses sincere sympathy to the Ducker (d) wishes the Farley Mowat a successful family in their loss. mission and thanks it for its efforts on be- COMMITTEES half of whales. Selection of Bills Committee Senator Lundy to move on the next day of sitting: Report That the Senate condemns the Howard Gov- Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (3.40 ernment’s targeted attack on women in Australian pm)—I present the 14th report of 2005 of the society through its extreme industrial relations Selection of Bills Committee. changes and the changes contained in the so- Ordered that the report be adopted. called welfare to work proposals. Senator McGAURAN—I seek leave to Senator Sherry to move on the next day have the report incorporated in Hansard. of sitting: Leave granted. That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Treasurer, no later than 2.30 pm The report read as follows— on Friday, 2 December 2005, all correspondence SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE in relation to the nomination and appointment of REPORT NO. 14 OF 2005 Mr Robert Gerard to the Board of the Reserve (1) The committee met in private session on Bank of Australia, from 1 January 2003 until Tuesday, 29 November 2005 at 4.26 pm. 1 December 2005, between: (2) The committee resolved to recommend— (a) the Department of the Treasury and the That the provisions of the Australian Citizen- Treasurer (Mr Costello); ship Bill 2005 and the Australian Citizenship (b) the Department of the Prime Minister and (Transitionals and Consequentials) Bill 2005 Cabinet and the Prime Minister (Mr How- be referred immediately to the Legal and ard); and Constitutional Legislation Committee for in- (c) the Attorney-General (Mr Ruddock) and quiry and report by 27 February 2006 (see the Treasurer. appendix for a statement of reasons for re- Senator Stephens to move on the next ferral). day of sitting: (3) The committee resolved to recommend— That the Senate— That the following bills not be referred to committees: (a) notes with sincere regret the death of Mr • John Patrick Ducker, AO, former member Anglo-Australian Telescope Agreement of the New South Wales Legislative Amendment Bill 2005 Council, on 25 November 2005; • Tax Laws Amendment (Improvements (b) acknowledges the contribution made by to Self Assessment) Bill (No. 2) 2005. Mr Ducker to the Australian Labor Party, The committee recommends accordingly. the Australian Council of Trade Unions, (Alan Eggleston) the New South Wales Labor Council and Acting Chair to the wellbeing of people of Australia through his leadership of the trade union 30 November 2005 movement; Appendix (c) recognises his contribution to public life Proposal to refer a bill to a committee through his service to the New South Wales Public Service Board, many com-

CHAMBER 96 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Name of bill(s): Murray, A.J.M. Nettle, K. Australian Citizenship Bill 2005 O’Brien, K.W.K. Polley, H. Sherry, N.J. Siewert, R. Reasons for referral/principal issues for consid- Stephens, U. Sterle, G. eration Stott Despoja, N. Webber, R. To examine the impacts and adequacy of the vari- Wong, P. Wortley, D. ous provisions of the bill, which intends to re- NOES place the Australian Citizenship Act 1948. Abetz, E. Adams, J. Possible submissions or evidence from: Barnett, G. Boswell, R.L.D. Ethnic community groups and representatives Brandis, G.H. Calvert, P.H. Muslim community groups and representatives Campbell, I.G. Chapman, H.G.P. Colbeck, R. Coonan, H.L. The Southern Cross Group Eggleston, A. Ellison, C.M. Migration Institute of Australia Ferguson, A.B. Fielding, S. Committee to which bill is referred: Fierravanti-Wells, C. Fifield, M.P. Heffernan, W. Humphries, G. Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee Johnston, D. Joyce, B. Possible hearing date: February 2006 Kemp, C.R. Lightfoot, P.R. Possible reporting date(s): 1 March 2006 Macdonald, I. Macdonald, J.A.L. Mason, B.J. McGauran, J.J.J. Whip/Selection of Bills Committee Member Minchin, N.H. Nash, F. MR NGUYEN TUONG VAN Parry, S. Payne, M.A. Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) Ronaldson, M. Santoro, S. Scullion, N.G. Troeth, J.M. (3.41 pm)—I move: Trood, R. Vanstone, A.E. That the Senate calls on the Government to do PAIRS everything possible to extradite Mr Nguyen Tuong Van from Singapore to prevent his im- Carr, K.J. Patterson, K.C. pending execution. Conroy, S.M. Hill, R.M. Hutchins, S.P. Watson, J.O.W. Question put. Ray, R.F. Ferris, J.M. The Senate divided. [3.45 pm] * denotes teller (The President—Senator the Hon. Paul Question negatived. Calvert) JAPANESE WHALING PROGRAM Ayes………… 32 Senator SIEWERT (Western Australia) Noes………… 36 (3.49 pm)—by leave—I move the motion as Majority……… 4 amended: That the Senate— AYES (a) notes the imminent arrival of the Japanese Allison, L.F. Bartlett, A.J.J. whaling fleet in the Southern Ocean and Bishop, T.M. Brown, B.J. its intention to commence whaling under Brown, C.L. Campbell, G. the greatly expanded JARPA II whaling Crossin, P.M. Evans, C.V. program; Faulkner, J.P. Forshaw, M.G. Hogg, J.J. Hurley, A. (b) recognises the leadership the Australian Kirk, L. Ludwig, J.W. Government has shown to date on this is- Lundy, K.A. Marshall, G. sue; McEwen, A. McLucas, J.E. Milne, C. Moore, C.

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 97

(c) notes that the radical expansion of the Ferguson, A.B. Fielding, S. Japanese whaling program gives rise to Fierravanti-Wells, C. Fifield, M.P. new opportunities to challenge JARPA II; Heffernan, W. Humphries, G. (d) urges Australia to commence a claim Johnston, D. Joyce, B. against Japan under the United Nations Kemp, C.R. Lightfoot, P.R. Convention on the Law of the Sea chal- Macdonald, I. Macdonald, J.A.L. lenging the legality of JARPA II, and re- Mason, B.J. McGauran, J.J.J. Minchin, N.H. Nash, F. questing provisional measures to halt the Parry, S. Payne, M.A. program while this claim is heard; and Ronaldson, M. Santoro, S. (e) urges Australia to examine actions the Scullion, N.G. Troeth, J.M. Government could take under other treaty Trood, R. Vanstone, A.E. measures such as the Antarctic Treaty Sys- PAIRS tem. Carr, K.J. Patterson, K.C. Question put: Conroy, S.M. Hill, R.M. That the motion (Senator Siewert’s) be agreed Hutchins, S.P. Watson, J.O.W. to. Ray, R.F. Ferris, J.M. The Senate divided. [3.53 pm] * denotes teller (The President—Senator the Hon. Paul Question negatived. Calvert) SAME-SEX MARRIAGE Ayes………… 32 Senator NETTLE (New South Wales) Noes………… 36 (3.56 pm)—by leave—I move: Majority……… 4 That the Senate— (a) congratulates Geoff and Jason for their AYES same-sex marriage ceremony held in Syd- Allison, L.F. Bartlett, A.J.J. ney on Friday, 25 November 2005 and Bishop, T.M. Brown, B.J. broadcast on radio and wishes them a Brown, C.L. Campbell, G. long, healthy and happy relationship; Crossin, P.M. Evans, C.V. (b) accepts the petition being presented in the Faulkner, J.P. Forshaw, M.G. week beginning 28 November 2005 by Hogg, J.J. Hurley, A. 4 545 people calling for changes to the Kirk, L. Ludwig, J.W. Marriage Act 1961 to include recognition Lundy, K.A. Marshall, G. of same-sex couples; McEwen, A. McLucas, J.E. Milne, C. Moore, C. (c) notes that the Government, with the sup- Murray, A.J.M. Nettle, K. port of the Australian Labor Party, is yet to O’Brien, K.W.K. Polley, H. recognise the legitimacy of same-sex mar- Sherry, N.J. Siewert, R. riage and, by doing so, infringes the rights Stephens, U. Sterle, G. of all people to be free from discrimina- Stott Despoja, N. Webber, R. tion based on sexuality; and Wong, P. Wortley, D. (d) calls on the Government to end this un- NOES fairness against same-sex couples, so that Abetz, E. Adams, J. people like Geoff and Jason no longer face Barnett, G. Boswell, R.L.D. discrimination. Brandis, G.H. Calvert, P.H. Question put: Campbell, I.G. Chapman, H.G.P. That the motion (Senator Nettle’s) be agreed Colbeck, R. Coonan, H.L. to. Eggleston, A. Ellison, C.M.

CHAMBER 98 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

The Senate divided. [3.58 pm] (i) the Australian Socceroos on their his- (The President—Senator Calvert) toric qualification for the 2006 World Cup in Germany and wishes them all Ayes………… 7 the best for the World Cup campaign, Noes………… 51 (ii) the Matildas on their outstanding re- Majority……… 44 sults achieved recently and wishes them all the best for their campaign AYES against China, and Allison, L.F. Bartlett, A.J.J. (iii) Football Federation Australia for un- Brown, B.J. Milne, C. dertaking a comprehensive reform Nettle, K. Siewert, R. * agenda in the sport of football over the Stott Despoja, N. past 2 years including the implementa- NOES tion of the recommendations of the Crawford Report; Abetz, E. Adams, J. Barnett, G. Bishop, T.M. (b) notes the key work undertaken by Mr Boswell, R.L.D. Brown, C.L. David Crawford in producing a blueprint Calvert, P.H. Campbell, G. for the reform of football in his report of Chapman, H.G.P. Coonan, H.L. the Independent Soccer Review Commit- Crossin, P.M. Eggleston, A. tee into the structure, governance and Ellison, C.M. Ferguson, A.B. management of soccer in Australia; Fielding, S. Fierravanti-Wells, C. (c) acknowledges the important contribution Fifield, M.P. Forshaw, M.G. of the Australian Sports Commission to Heffernan, W. Hogg, J.J. the reform program and supports its de- Humphries, G. Hurley, A. velopment of young football players, par- Johnston, D. Joyce, B. ticularly through the Australian Institute of Kemp, C.R. Kirk, L. Sport Football program; and Lightfoot, P.R. Ludwig, J.W. Lundy, K.A. Macdonald, I. (d) notes the commitment held by many Aus- Macdonald, J.A.L. Marshall, G. tralians to football and supports the Com- McEwen, A. McGauran, J.J.J. * monwealth in its endeavours to support McLucas, J.E. Minchin, N.H. Australian football. Moore, C. Nash, F. Question agreed to. Parry, S. Polley, H. Ronaldson, M. Santoro, S. MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Scullion, N.G. Sherry, N.J. Kyoto Protocol Stephens, U. Sterle, G. Troeth, J.M. Vanstone, A.E. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT Webber, R. Wong, P. (Senator Moore)—The President has re- Wortley, D. ceived a letter from Senator Milne proposing * denotes teller that a definite matter of public importance be Question negatived. submitted to the Senate for discussion, namely: SPORTING ACHIEVEMENTS “On the eve of the first meeting of the Parties to Senator KEMP (Victoria—Minister for the Kyoto Protocol in Montreal, the urgent need the Arts and Sport) (4.02 pm)—I, and also on for the Australian government to ratify the Kyoto behalf of Senator Lundy, move: Protocol and to commit to more stringent green- That the Senate— house gas reduction targets for the period 2013 to (a) congratulates: 2017.”

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 99

I call upon those senators who approve of the the world to hear the current minister, Minis- proposed discussion to rise in their places. ter Campbell, going around talking about More than the number of senators re- Australia being on track to meet its targets quired by the standing orders having risen in and criticising the European Union countries their places— that are falling behind in their capacity to meet their targets, because they all commit- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— ted to significant reductions, unlike Austra- I understand that informal arrangements have lia, which committed to an increase. been made to allocate specific times to each of the speakers in today’s debate. With the Recent figures which have just come out concurrence of the Senate, I shall ask the show that Australia’s greenhouse gas emis- clerks to set the clock accordingly. sions have increased by 23.3 per cent in the transport and electricity sectors. The only Senator MILNE (Tasmania) (4.04 pm)— reason that we can say that we are on track As most senators would be aware, this week for an eight per cent increase is because we in Montreal the world is gathering for an can take into account land use, land use historic meeting. In 1997 the Kyoto protocol changes and forestry, and that is going to be was signed; in February this year it was rati- a one-off in terms of being able to count fied and came into effect. So this is the first what in fact is protecting some areas of for- meeting of the parties to the protocol and in est and native vegetation. But in our energy accordance with that there will be another and transport sectors we are zooming ahead, meeting happening at the same time of those increasing greenhouse gas production, as the countries which have not ratified. One hun- rest of the world is trying to do something dred and fifty-six countries will be meeting about it. to talk about the protocol that they have ratified and the only industrialised countries not What we have to get from Montreal is to be participating in that meeting will be Kyoto Plus. Unless we get the world to Australia and the United States. It is a dis- commit to a second commitment period we grace to this nation that we and the United will lose the capacity for investment in the States stand aside from the rest of the indus- renewable sector and in all of the technolo- trialised world in failing to ratify the Kyoto gies that we need to address particularly in protocol. the transport and energy sectors. At the moment we are not seeing that. Australians will The Minister for the Environment and be embarrassed to know that the minister for Heritage and the government have said time the environment, who will be representing and time again that the reason they have not this country in Montreal, is not taking part in ratified Kyoto is that it does not go far debate on this urgency motion in the Senate enough, that its targets are too weak. I want today. Apparently he does not feel it is nec- to say at the outset that the reason the targets essary to tell the Australian parliament what are so weak is that governments like Austra- he is going to do in Montreal over the next lia’s went out of their way to undermine 10 days. At the very least, he should be in every effort to make those targets more here telling us what he is going to commit to stringent. In fact the former minister, Minis- when he gets to Montreal. He will be chair- ter Hill, will recall that he was jubilant about ing the umbrella group as a side event to the the fact that Australia was able to negotiate main show. Australia is an observer at this for itself an eight per cent increase in the meeting. We will be on the sidelines, over 1990 levels. And it is an affront to the rest of with the recalcitrants. The main thing is that

CHAMBER 100 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Australia does not use its role, as it has done that he wants to spend a million dollars look- previously, to undermine global efforts on ing into nuclear power. He is the minister for the environment. mirrors, looking into everything, looking into Every time the minister is challenged on nuclear. That would be a waste of a million this, he stands up and says two things: Kyoto dollars. We do not need to look into nuclear does not go far enough; he wants to go much to know that it is not economically viable in further. We have common ground. Every- this country, it is expensive, it will be a long- body in this parliament wants to go much term prospect, it generates waste and it is further. We all know that we have to slash dangerous. greenhouse gas emissions by 60 per cent by Why is the government so intent on such a 2050 to even stabilise in the long term where no-brainer as spending a million dollars on we are now. My question to the minister is: something when we have cheaper, faster why won’t he get behind a second commit- technology that we can implement tomor- ment period, ratify Kyoto and agree to much row? We could implement renewables to- more stringent targets? If he wants stringent morrow. Nuclear is one of those things that targets, good. I am all for stringent targets. are out there. Why are they talking up nu- Let him go to Montreal and argue for them. clear? It is not for Australian industry or for But, no, he has said quite clearly that targets Australia. It is about legitimising the export and emission level controls are not some- of coal and uranium to China and India. That thing that he is interested in pursuing. What a is all that this about. When Senator Ian surprise—that is the United States perspec- Campbell gets to Montreal he will no doubt tive as well! We have President Bush’s ef- talk with China and India about that export forts in Canada and the deputy sheriff, Aus- arrangement for coal and uranium as the rest tralia, coming along behind. In fact, it is very of the world tries to get on with doing some- likely that Senator Campbell will behave as thing about greenhouse gas emission reduc- the fall guy for the US in a lot of the negotia- tion. tions. That is what has happened previously. There are certain moments in history that Australia goes for the most extreme position really matter, that profoundly matter. This in objecting to what the rest of the world meeting is one of them. It is not just any wants and then the US comes in behind and global meeting; it is a meeting to address the tends to look reasonable. That is the way that most significant security threat of our time. they have behaved in recent negotiations. I Already in Australia increased temperatures, want to make it clear that I am speaking rising sea levels, extreme weather events and about the minister for the environment, Sena- more intense flood, fire and drought regimes tor Ian Campbell, who will represent Austra- are occurring. Coastal areas are suffering lia at these talks. erosion because of storm surges. We are The other thing the minister says is: ‘Aus- finding all kinds of localised impacts of cli- tralia is spending a lot of money.’ How much mate change. In the Pacific, countries are money you spend does not necessarily faced with losing their fresh water supplies equate to the outcomes you get. The gov- because of salt water contaminating those ernment is spending $500 million on its low supplies. People are being displaced because emissions fund, but 90 per cent of that is go- of climate change. Areas in the world will be ing to the coal industry. What have we had in too hot for human habitation. The AMA and the last two days? We have had an an- the ACF tell us that within the next 50 years nouncement from Minister Brendan Nelson we will have thousands of people dying from

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 101 diseases such as dengue fever and from heat pan-European trading system is up and run- exhaustion—in ways we have never previ- ning. Carbon trading, emissions trading and ously seen. the cap-and-trade program are well under- In Australia we will suffer extreme effects stood in Europe and occurring right now. of climate change. I notice that Senator Australia is going to be left out in the cold. McGauran is shaking his head. Read the lit- What is more ridiculous is that the minute erature, Senator McGauran. Every single George Bush leaves the White House we will credible scientist now agrees that whilst find the US changing its position on climate global warming is a natural process it is be- change. It has trillions of dollars already in- ing accelerated by human-induced factors. A volved in the markets. Australia is going to massive slab of the Antarctic sea ice has bro- be sitting out there by itself, isolated from ken off the Larsen C. The icecaps are melt- the global community and still regarded as a ing and retreating. There is species extinction pariah. as never before. At least 30 per cent of the There is no doubt that, whilst the minister world’s species will be extinct by 2050 be- claims that his government is the greenest cause of climate change. Coral reefs are be- that Australia has seen in a while, from the ing bleached. The Southern Ocean is becom- rest of the world’s perspective—because ing more acidified. The global conveyor belt Australia has failed to ratify Kyoto, because is slowing down. What is really going on due Australia has failed to invest in renewable to global warming is terrifying. In terms of a energies and because it has failed to lift the security issue, this is the one that Australia is mandatory renewable energy target—money sitting back and failing to take responsibility is already leaking out of those programs. All for. the minister would have to do today is lift the Senator Ian Campbell should be telling mandatory renewable energy target to 10 per Australians what he means when says he is cent to guarantee investment in renewables. going to achieve a 60 per cent reduction in All he has to do today is introduce a manda- greenhouse gas emissions by technology tory energy efficiency target for the country, transfer. He can do that within the Kyoto introduce a national cap on energy genera- protocol framework. That provides for the tion and greenhouse gas emissions or de- clean development mechanism, which allows velop an emissions trading system. for technology transfer between developed There are all sorts of opportunities around and developing countries. If he wants to get greenhouse, as well as threats. Australia’s involved then he should get involved in that inaction, its commitment only to voluntary way. His other argument is: ‘You will put a agreements and its sheer obstructionist tac- wet blanket over the Australian economy.’ tics with its foolish Asia-Pacific Partnership The only people putting a wet blanket are the for Clean Development and Climate look Howard government, including Senator Ian ridiculous on the world stage. That partner- Campbell, by locking Australia out of all the ship is going to be shown up for the thread- global trading mechanisms and investments bare partnership that it is. There is no money that are going to flow as a result of Kyoto involved, there is no text around it, there are being ratified. no emissions targets and there are no goals. Trillions of dollars are going into funds in It is just a voluntary arrangement about the the US that are starting to look for invest- export of coal and uranium to China and In- ment opportunities around the world. The dia. And what a surprise: it was initiated in the US.

CHAMBER 102 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Senator Campbell did not come up with tween 1990 and 2010, its greenhouse gas the idea of the Asia-Pacific partnership; he emissions are expected to grow by only eight got it from Washington. He has just been to per cent. The report shows that actions taken Europe and come back with his nuclear by governments, industry and the community ideas, no doubt—and his voluntary partner- mean Australia will save 85 million tonnes of ships and his technology transfer ideas. But greenhouse gas emissions a year by 2010. the point is that the rest of the world has got The Australian government is certainly lead- serious. What a shame; what a disgrace for ing the way by investing in a range of meas- this country. How do you think Australians ures through its $1.8 billion climate change feel to know that 156 industrialised coun- strategy. In fact, as senators on this side of tries—all of the industrialised countries of the Senate boasted today, the Howard gov- the world, with the exception of Australia ernment will go down as the most environ- and the US—are going to be seriously nego- mentally friendly government in the history tiating and trying to come to an agreement of our country. on the post-Kyoto period? We must have a While we are on track to meet our short- regime for 2013 to 2017 to guarantee the term target, the government recognise the investment in the clean technology we need need to cut emissions beyond Kyoto. Our for the transition to a low-carbon economy. investment in the development of low emis- If the government fail at that and if Australia sions technologies for the future is part of plays a significant role in undermining our strategy to achieve this, and this is what achieving that then they will be known not Senator Campbell will be discussing with only as irresponsible global citizens but as leaders at the meeting next week. It is impor- climate criminals. tant for Australians to understand the reality Senator SANTORO (Queensland) (4.17 of this issue: 1.2 billion people live in ex- pm)—As every member of the Senate would treme poverty throughout the world. In de- acknowledge, climate change is probably the veloping countries, communities suffer from most significant environmental issue the diseases and restricted access to food, medi- globe is facing today. The Minister for the cal treatment, clean water and education be- Environment and Heritage, Senator Ian cause they do not have access to reticulated Campbell, as Senator Milne has informed the energy supplies. If we are to ensure future Senate, will be attending the UN climate generations of these people are lifted out of change conference in Montreal next week to their desperate poverty, there must be a conduct high-level talks with world leaders growth in energy production, not a reduction. about our response to this environmental The challenge is to find ways in which the challenge. world’s growing energy needs can be met As senators know, Senator Campbell this with zero or minimal greenhouse gas emis- week released a new report showing that sions. World science tells us we will need a Australia remains on track to meet its Kyoto 50 to 60 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions emissions within the next 50 years or so. The to 108 per cent of their 1990 level by 2010. Kyoto protocol actually has emissions in- That achievement cannot be denied. Austra- creasing by 40 per cent by 2012. Australia’s lia is one of only a handful of industrialised record is proving there is a way forward that countries that is on track to its target through allows emission cuts and economic growth. domestic action alone. While the Australian We are forecast to save 85 million tonnes of economy is expected to almost double be- greenhouse gas emissions a year by 2010 due

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 103 to climate change programs put in place by is incredibly important. We were told by the the Howard government, while the economy IEA at the Second World Renewable Energy is still expected to almost double. This is the Forum in 2004 that that will cost in the re- equivalent of taking every one of Australia’s gion of $USI7 trillion. It is that very invest- 14 million cars, trucks and buses off the road ment that will solve the problem. and stopping all rail, air and shipping activ- Radical cuts to emissions are needed at a ity, while still providing major economic time when world energy use will continue to growth. To put it in economic terms: based rise. This absolutely pivotal joint public pol- on per dollar GDP expenditure, this repre- icy achievement is required right across the sents a fall in greenhouse gas emissions of globe. I doubt that there is any challenge the 43 per cent between 1990 and 2010 while the world has faced as important as the need to Australian economy doubles in size. expand energy use while reducing green- However, Australia working on its own house gas emissions. We must not only de- will achieve little. It produces 1.4 per cent of ploy existing technologies such as wind and the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. If we solar but embrace others such as the geose- were to close Australia down completely— questration—that is, injecting underground— turning off every school, hospital, car and of carbon dioxide. We must consider nuclear truck, as the Labor and Greens’ policies energy and continue to invest in research to would effectively have us do—a rapidly ex- develop new technologies and encourage panding China would replicate the resulting private industry participation, as Australia is greenhouse gas savings in just 11 months. As doing with its $500 million Low Emission a First World nation, Australia has the capac- Technology Demonstration Fund. Australia ity and the responsibility to develop the tech- and the world must be open to every viable nology necessary to provide real solutions to option. The antinuclear, antigeosequestra- climate change and it is doing so in partner- tion, antitechnology, anti-economic growth ship with private industry and other nations, brigade would condemn the world to life in with the assistance of $1.8 billion in Austra- the Dark Ages. lian government funding. British PM Tony Blair told a G8 meeting The International Energy Agency fore- earlier this month that the world needs to casts that the world’s energy requirements move beyond Kyoto. Blair, originally a will almost double between now and 2030. champion of the Kyoto protocol, now says it This will require 7,800 new power genera- ‘is not enough’ and: tion facilities around the globe—a massive We need to cut greenhouse emissions radically expansion in power generation and energy but Kyoto doesn’t even stabilise them. consumption. It also tells us that 80 per cent That is what a Labour Prime Minister across of this energy, even by the year 2030, is the world says. When he addressed the G8 he likely to be generated using fossil fuels. Of said: course, the so-called green activists who What we need to do is to try to develop the right would prefer to see the economy shrunk as a partnership, and then the right framework, so that way to reduce greenhouse gases will find we are developing the science and technology that alarming. If you keep in mind the need that we need, that we are doing this in a way that to alleviate poverty, to lift living standards, allows us then to transfer that technology and to drive a strong economy and to create the share it between developed and developing world wherewithal to solve climate change, you ... understand that building these power stations

CHAMBER 104 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Tony Blair has effectively articulated Austra- Pacific partnership follows the resounding lia’s position on climate change. The vision approval given to it by shadow minister for of this Labour leader is refreshing. Unfortu- primary industries, resources, forestry and nately, the Labor Party in Australia cannot tourism, Martin Ferguson, at the Australian seem to move beyond its two-word environ- Uranium Conference in Perth just last month. mental policy: sign Kyoto. This is what he had to say: However, I should say that the Labor This is where the recent Asia-Pacific Partnership Party has at least belatedly recognised the on Clean Development and Climate really comes importance of the new Asia-Pacific Partner- into its own, offering Australia an opportunity for ship on Clean Development and Climate—a its own economic growth and an opportunity to partnership approach that involves 50 per be part of the solution to the environmental consequences of what is happening in our cent of the world’s greenhouse gas emit- region—one of the most rapid expansions of ters—which is vital to solving the problem. economic activity that has occurred in world Labor’s environment spokesperson, Anthony history. Albanese, was sent into federal parliament Labor senators opposite should reflect very yesterday to strongly endorse the Howard carefully on those words by Mr Ferguson government’s Asia-Pacific Partnership on and also on the endorsement by their Clean Development and Climate. Mr Al- environment spokesman, Mr Albanese, of the banese told parliament: regional partnership arrangements that We say that the Asia-Pacific climate pact is Australia has entered into. good—it is consistent ... The statement of the climate pact says that it is consistent with our Such ringing endorsement of the Howard obligations under the Kyoto protocol. It also says government’s climate change partnership by that it will build on existing bilateral and multilat- members of the opposition is welcome, but it eral initiatives. highlights just how confused the Labor Party The Asia-Pacific partnership involves Aus- and its leader, Kim Beazley, really are. Cli- tralia, the US, China, Japan, South Korea and mate change, we all agree, is a reality and it India, which together are responsible for al- requires a realistic, pragmatic, world coop- most 50 per cent of the world’s greenhouse erative approach if we are to meet its chal- gas emissions, working together to develop lenges and also enable economies to grow, as clean energy technology. they must for the sake of humanity. We cannot go down the path of having a confused Senator McGauran—He didn’t even policy position which is constantly changing mention that. from that of the Leader of the Labor Party to Senator SANTORO—My honourable a different one adopted almost on a daily colleague Senator McGauran is very good to basis by his shadow ministers. And we can- highlight that that was not mentioned by the not have the policy position articulated by first speaker from the Greens. When it was the Greens, which I believe is an intellectu- announced on 28 July this year Mr Beazley ally deficient position and which clearly fails said: ‘It’s nothing. It’s spin.’ Mr Albanese’s to recognise the achievements of this gov- comments yesterday display yet another pol- ernment in meeting its Kyoto targets. We icy splashdown by the Labor Party, which cannot have a solution that is based on the cannot seem to figure out just what its cli- Greens’ solution, for that would lead the mate change position is. The federal ALP’s Australian economy into a decline and it endorsement in parliament of the Asia- would lead to an economy that shed jobs

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 105 rather than created them at record levels, as it market incentives to invest in energy effi- has been doing during the last 10 years. ciencies and mandate standards for CO2 In the end, what Australians want from the abatement, with specific quantifiable and Greens is more enlightenment, but enlight- meaningful targets. We need a carbon trading enment that is based on serious intellectual scheme, or to at least to provide support for a argument and serious policy formulation states carbon trading scheme, and to mandate rather than the spurious arguments and im- maximum levels of carbon emissions for practical policies that we hear from the Australia according to diminishing bench- Greens every day in this place. More impor- marks towards that goal of 60 per cent by tantly, certainly from the point of view of 2050. And we need to reconsider—or at least today’s debate, they are arguments which consider for the first time, in the case of the refuse to recognise the reality of what has government—the benefits of a carbon tax as been achieved and do not give credit where a tool to reduce carbon emissions in the in- credit is due. (Time expired) dustrial sector. Senator ALLISON (Victoria—Leader of We could also enormously reduce trans- the Australian Democrats) (4.28 pm)— port emissions by developing car fuel effi- Australia remains the highest greenhouse ciency standards to ensure that by 2015 aver- emitter per capita in the developed world and age fuel consumption of the car fleet, includ- we have a long way to go before we make a ing most four-wheel drives, would be a difference to greenhouse emissions in this maximum of four litres per 100 kilometres. country. I will quickly run through a few We should conserve oil reserves and use suggestions for the government, in case they natural gas as a transition fuel to other re- are listening. What we need is a detailed newable energy fuels. We should manufac- ture energy efficient hybrid electric cars now. long-term strategy that includes specific CO2 emission reduction targets for 2010, 2020 We should use Australia’s massive subsidies and 2030 and the ultimate goal of reaching to the auto industry to deliver on that. We greenhouse emission reductions by at least should be getting ethanol into fuel tanks. We 60 per cent by 2050, and beyond that by should be using CNG and LPG as alterna- probably 80 per cent. tives to petrol. We should set abatement time frames and We should also look at the costs of oil de- raise the abatement targets for projects seek- pletion and make sure that they are embed- ing funding through programs such as the ded in the price of diesel petrol and aviation Low Emission Technology Development fuels. We should utilise other green taxes Fund. We should provide incentives to en- designed to decouple the growth in oil con- courage the uptake of current energy effi- sumption from the growth of domestic prod- ciencies, such as by adopting the New South uct. We should use green taxes to rebuild and Wales BASIX energy efficiency scheme on a enhance rail infrastructure in urban areas. We national basis. We should commit to ongoing should promote and fund the uptake of tele- funding for the Photovoltaic Rebate Pro- commuting, ecodriving, car pooling and gram. We should examine the costs of in- TravelSmart programs in all urban areas. creasing MRET to at least five per cent by They are just a few suggestions, and the gov- 2010, 10 per cent by 2020 and 50 per cent by ernment has taken up none of those. They 2050. We should develop more comprehen- have all appeared in reports previously made sive policy frameworks that will set stronger by the Senate. (Time expired)

CHAMBER 106 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Senator LUNDY (Australian Capital Ter- capital cities in southern Australia—Sydney, ritory) (4.31 pm)—Climate change is the Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth—and all of most significant environmental issue facing the places in between will face increased our planet, and I am pleased to be able to pressure on access to critical natural re- make a contribution on behalf of Labor to sources like water. this matter of public importance. It is a chal- Climate change is also a public health is- lenge that requires strong action and leader- sue. Recent research from the Australian ship from the federal government. Tragically Medical Association and the Australian Con- to date, we have had plenty of rhetoric from servation Foundation suggests that tempera- the government but not enough action. We ture related deaths in Australia could more need a little less conversation and a lot more than double over the next 15 years to 500 action. The United Nations Climate Change deaths per year, flood related deaths and in- Conference starting this week in Montreal is juries may increase by 240 per cent in some a critical point in the fight to avoid danger- regions, and there will be an increase in the ous climate change. There will be about intensity and frequency of food borne and 7,000 delegates and observers from 189 water borne disease. Make no mistake, this countries at the UN meeting to discuss how will have a wide impact and will particularly countries can better work together to address hurt low-income earners, the elderly and re- climate change. This will be the first meeting mote Aboriginal communities. Hurricane of parties to the Kyoto protocol—a landmark Katrina is a window into the future. Scien- event. This is a time when the world needs to tists tell us climate change will bring more stop, look at the warning signs and say, ‘We severe hurricanes and cyclones. It was those will take action,’ and the Australian govern- who are vulnerable in our communities who ment needs to move from rhetoric to action. felt the full force of Hurricane Katrina. It It needs to join, not stand apart from, the was the poor who were worst affected. That international community. It urgently needs to means climate change is a social justice issue ratify the Kyoto protocol. as well. It is a health issue, it is an environ- Climate change is a real and present dan- mental issue, and it will have a profound ger to Australia. The government’s own Cli- impact on our economy. And the truth is that, mate change: Risk and vulnerability report, after 10 long years of the Howard govern- released in July this year, should have been a ment, we are unprepared for the dramatic wake up call for the Howard government and challenges that climate change will bring. all Australians. It suggested Australia could The Climate change: Risk and vulnerabil- face the following risks from climate change: ity report urged the government to put a an increase in annual national average tem- strong focus on preparing for the impact of peratures of between 0.4 and two degrees by climate change, with a particular priority 2030 and up to six degrees by 2070; as much given to our majestic World Heritage areas. as a 20 per cent reduction in rainfall in south- There is no real evidence that this has oc- west Australia and up to a 20 per cent reduc- curred. The storm clouds of climate change tion in run-off in the Murray-Darling Basin hang darkly over the future of many of our by 2030; and even more severe cyclones, great natural wonders. The Great Barrier storms and bushfires. These threats could put Reef could be one of the first victims of cli- some of our significant population and tour- mate change. Rising global water tempera- ist centres, like Cairns, Broome, Darwin and tures are increasing the incidence of bleach- Townsville, at considerable risk. Our major ing events and coral diseases, and this could

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 107 result in the complete collapse of the reef properly addressing the causes of climate within 40 years. The wet tropics are also change. For without a stable climate, ad- highly vulnerable to climate change. Half of dressing other environmental threats will be Northern Queensland’s highland tropical impossible, creating a future where our natu- forests could disappear over this century. The ral heritage is diminished and our water re- report urged the government to develop ad- sources continue to degrade. aptation plans for our alpine areas and the As I have said, the urgency of climate Murray-Darling Basin, and to prepare for a change means that it is time for less conver- significant reduction in water supply for our sation and a lot more action. A Labor gov- major southern cities, including Melbourne. ernment would take action. It would ratify It urged the government to explicitly factor the Kyoto protocol and it would cut Austra- the threat from climate change into its fund- lia’s greenhouse pollution. It would also hold ing programs. There is no real evidence that a national summit on climate change. The this has occurred. New South Wales Premier has written to the The report urged the government to de- Prime Minister requesting such a summit. If velop adaptation options for urban systems the Prime Minister were serious about tack- and emergency services. This would include ling climate change, he would agree to this ensuring that the current study of emergency request. The New South Wales Premier has management priorities and responses being proposed four agenda items for the summit: carried out by COAG systematically includes market based policy frameworks; assessing, the additional risks posed by climate change. measuring and targeting future carbon and Do you think that has happened? There is other greenhouse gas risks; developing inter- absolutely no evidence at all that it has. Is national linkages to international carbon Australia prepared for more intense cy- trading and climate change initiatives to as- clones? Is Australia ready for a category 5 sist Australian business; and the role of taxa- cyclone hitting Cairns, Townsville or Bris- tion and other incentives in promoting bane? Are we prepared for the full force of greenhouse gas emissions reduction. climate change? The answer to all of these These are all critical issues, but the sum- questions is no. I certainly do not think we mit should not be limited to just these points. are ready. Ten long years of the Howard gov- Other critical issues could include the fol- ernment has left us unprepared for these ma- lowing: obviously, ratifying the Kyoto proto- jor, significant and quite intimidating chal- col and preparing for a post-2012 interna- lenges. The truth is the Howard government tional framework; establishing an ambitious, is frozen in time while the world warms mandatory renewable energy target; and pre- around it. paring for the impact of climate change by According to the Bureau of Meteorology, developing adaptation strategies for our September 2005 was the warmest September wonderful and majestic World Heritage ar- for 125 years and 2005 is on track to be the eas; addressing water demand and supply hottest year since annual records began in and developing disaster mitigation strategies. 1910. The bureau says climate change is the Yet, in spite of all the evidence, the How- cause. Given this evidence, this month’s UN ard government still refuses to join the other report that Australia’s greenhouse pollution 156 countries taking global action by ratify- rose by more than 23 per cent between 1990 ing the Kyoto protocol. The Kyoto protocol and 2003 is cause for alarm. It is even more is not perfect—no international agreement alarming that the Howard government is not

CHAMBER 108 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 ever is—but it is an important first step in deficit and the issue of exports. It is pure cutting global greenhouse pollution. The es- folly and it has been frustrating to see the sence of the Kyoto protocol is the role of the Howard government’s continued refusal to market in driving new technology. The clean ratify the Kyoto protocol. It is hurting our development mechanism of the Kyoto proto- economy. col is becoming an important source of new The Prime Minister said on 11 October finance for projects in developing countries. that: Because the Howard government will not Kyoto has always been inadequate for Australia’s ratify the Kyoto protocol, Australian compa- interests. It was never right for Australia to sign nies cannot access the clean development up to Kyoto. mechanism and thus miss out on huge busi- But Mr Howard was not always negative ness opportunities. about the Kyoto protocol. Back in 1997, on The clean development mechanism proc- 19 December, the Prime Minister said: ess creates a win-win-win situation—a win We end the year having achieved this ... abso- for the environment, a win for private indus- lutely stunning diplomatic success at the Kyoto try and a win for jobs. The first CDM project conference. That was an extraordinary achieve- to be approved and registered was a Dutch ment, that Kyoto summit—an absolutely extraor- funded landfill gas-to-energy project in Bra- dinary achievement—and it was against all the zil. Local benefits include improved water odds ... I mean, what we were able to do at Kyoto quality, reduced risk of explosion of landfill was, both, make a massive contribution to the gas, job creation and 10 per cent of electric- world environmental effort to cut greenhouse gas ity donated for use in schools, hospitals and emissions but also to protect Australian jobs ... thanks to the superb negotiating job that [Federal other public buildings. This illustrates the Environment Minister] Robert Hill did at Kyoto, types of projects that can be undertaken we achieved a win for the environment and a win through such investment. Brazil, China and for Australian jobs. India have the greatest potential for the new So, what happened? Why did the Prime Min- mechanism. India has developed more clean ister seemingly change his mind and not rat- energy proposals than any other country and ify the protocol? It is quite unusual and it China recently adopted a proactive approach shows the hypocrisy of the Howard govern- that is expected to make it a key player. ment’s stance. The clean development mechanism is a The government is now touting the Asia- huge business opportunity for Australian Pacific climate pact as a replacement for the companies. Many of these projects are lo- Kyoto protocol. It is not. The Asia-Pacific cated in Asia and, with the government’s climate pact is positive but limited. Technol- refusal to ratify the Kyoto protocol, Austra- ogy transfer and working with our Asia- lian business cannot participate directly in Pacific neighbours is critical to delivering these projects, nor can they hold or trade outcomes. But we need to be serious about carbon credits from these projects. It is a making real progress and not simply re- significant statement of the despair of the badging old commitments. As the vision Australian companies that some of them statement acknowledges, it aims to: have actually set up offshore subsidiaries. We are sending Australian companies over- ... build on existing bilateral and multilateral seas, establishing these subsidiaries so they initiatives. can participate in this scheme, at a time when In 1992—over a decade ago—all the mem- we are worried about our current account bers of the partnership signed up to almost

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 109 identical commitments as part of the United showed that the UK had reduced its emis- Nations framework convention on climate sions by 13 per cent. Over this period, the change. A year after that, Australia, Japan British economy has grown by 38 per cent. and the US launched the International En- So, in spite of all of the evidence, Australia ergy Agency’s Greenhouse Gas Technology and the United States remain the only indus- Information Exchange program— trialised nations which have not ratified the GREENTIE. This was followed a few years Kyoto protocol. The government’s compla- later by the climate technology initiative. cency means that we are missing out on the More recently, the Carbon Sequestration significant economic opportunities that come Leadership Forum was launched with essen- from being world leaders in tackling climate tially the same countries and the same com- change. By doing the right thing by the envi- mitments. Even the document itself concedes ronment by investing in clean energy and that the partnership is meant to: supporting market mechanisms to cut green- ... complement, but not replace, the Kyoto pro- house pollution, we can create innovative tocol. new industries and be at the forefront of the All sides of politics agree with exchange of sustainability revolution. That is the chal- research and collaboration over new technol- lenge before the Howard government. It is a ogy. That is a given. And everyone in this challenge that Labor has indicated it is will- conference has been participating in that ing, ready and able to take on. (Time expired) process. The question is: how do you drive Senator EGGLESTON (Western Austra- change? The Asia-Pacific climate pact has no lia) (4.46 pm)—We have been through this targets, no funding allocation and no market debate many times in this chamber. We all mechanism to drive change. Technology acknowledge that there is a problem with the transfer cannot achieve the outcomes we greenhouse effect. We know and understand need, as has been proven over and over that, and I think we all know that Kyoto will again. do almost nothing to ameliorate the green- The government’s complacency means house effect. It is estimated that the Kyoto that we are missing out on the significant treaty, which Senator Lundy has just extolled economic opportunities that come from be- the virtues of, will reduce greenhouse emis- ing world leaders in tackling climate change. sions by only one per cent—just one per Australia would have been well placed to be cent. Kyoto is a symbol. It is a symbol to all the Silicon Valley of solar energy 10 years the people around the world who are con- ago. But, after nearly a decade of being cerned about climate change. We should be starved of government backing, it is hard to concerned about it, but the Kyoto treaty adds imagine Australia being able to recover the nothing. It does not really do anything to position we once held in photovoltaics, as a reduce the problem of greenhouse gas emis- world leader in solar energy. Without na- sions, nor does it make any changes worth tional leadership, opportunities to capitalise having in relation to climate change. on the fast growing climate change friendly Why is this? The answer is quite simple: industries will be lost to Australian firms. the Kyoto treaty does not include among its Preparing for a carbon constrained future can signatories the major emitters around the certainly be of economic benefit. world—mostly the Third World countries The same UN report which indicated our and countries like China, which has an enor- greenhouse emissions were spiralling mous level of emissions. China is in fact the second largest global emitter and its emis-

CHAMBER 110 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 sions are continuing to grow in line with its 108 per cent of the 1990 levels by 2008-12— rapid economic growth. Behind China in our and we are on track to do so. We are, as I region is India, which is the fifth largest said, one of a handful of nations who are global emitter. By and large, the South responding to this problem in a meaningful American countries are not signatories. The way. For example, Australia was the first Russian Federation in Europe is a huge emit- country in the world to set up a greenhouse ter and until recently, when they did a deal office. We have not signed up to Kyoto but with the European Union, the Russians had we do recognise the problem and we have set not signed on to the Kyoto treaty. up a greenhouse office. The Howard gov- The Kyoto treaty is a catchcry when it ernment has a very fine record in dealing comes to concerns about global warming but with the issues of renewable energies and it is actually a sham. It is a treaty which low-emissions technology. At the domestic really does not achieve anything. For that level, the government has directed more than reason, the Australian government has de- $500 million to low-emissions technology clined to sign on to it. The Australian gov- research and a demonstration fund to provide ernment’s position is, quite rightly, that it grants of $20 million and upwards to projects will not sign on to a treaty to do with global which demonstrate the commercial viability warming until it is a genuinely international of low-emissions technology across the full treaty and covers all the major emitters in the spectrum of energy sources in this country. world because, until that happens, we would We have provided $30.7 million for the just be pretending to do something about Australian climate change science program greenhouse gas emissions and global warm- to facilitate climate change research. The ing. Cities for Climate Protection program in- From the Australian point of view, we volves 675 local governments around the recognise that global warming is an issue and world and 30 per cent of them are in Austra- we have a very fine record in dealing with lia. Australian local governments have these problems. We are one of the few na- signed on to this project, and in 2004-05 tions in the world which, through our own councils reported greenhouse abatement of efforts, are meeting our greenhouse emission 1.55 million tonnes, a 22 per cent increase on targets as if we were signatories to the Kyoto the previous year. The $14.2 million National treaty. That is in very clear contrast to the Climate Change Adaptation Program has countries of Western Europe—especially the been put in place to assist state and local Germans, who are so critical of us—who governments, industry and communities plan claim to meet their greenhouse targets. When for unavoidable climate change. you look closely at the European Union you This government has a range of programs find that very few European Union countries to promote the development of the renewable actually meet their greenhouse targets except energy industry. These include the manda- through the use of nuclear energy. One has to tory renewable energy target, the $100 mil- say that, from an environmental point of lion Renewable Energy Development Initia- view, that is a rather questionable way of tive, the $20.5 million renewable energy achieving those targets. storage program, the $205 million Renew- As I said, despite having no legal obliga- able Remote Power Generation program, the tion to do so, Australia is committed to meet- $48 million Renewable Energy Commer- ing its Kyoto target of limiting emissions to cialisation Program, the $19 million Renew- able Energy Equity Fund and the $40 million

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 111

Photovoltaic Rebate Program. Australia has a there is a conflict between her leader Mr very fine record in dealing with the issue of Beazley and other members of the ALP. greenhouse problems, and we have put a lot When this was announced on 28 July this of money into developing renewable energy year, Mr Beazley, the Leader of the Opposi- programs. tion, said: ‘It’s nothing. It’s spin.’ This is an It is absolute nonsense for people like agreement formed with the US, China, India, Senator Lundy and for the Greens senators to Japan and Korea, covering 50 per cent of the continue to criticise the government and to world’s population and 44 per cent of the continue to bleat that we should sign a com- world’s greenhouse gas emissions—and it is pletely meaningless treaty which will do al- ‘spin’. Fortunately, Mr Albanese has obvi- most nothing to reduce greenhouse emissions ously woken up to the realities of the situa- around the world. Australia is doing a fine tion. Mr Albanese is from the other place. job and we do not need to sign this treaty His seat I forget, although I should remember because we are already on the record as re- it. ducing greenhouse emissions in this country. Senator Wong—Grayndler. Senator RONALDSON (Victoria) (4.54 Senator RONALDSON—Thank you pm)—The reality is that this agreement is a very much, Senator Wong. To his credit, the dud. As far as the Greens are concerned, the member for Grayndler in the other place said more things change, the more they stay the on 29 November: same. Rather than the broken record that we We say that the Asia-Pacific climate pact is have heard over recent years from the Greens good—it is consistent ... The statement of the in relation to the signing of the Kyoto climate pact says that it is consistent with our agreement, it would be nice to hear some- obligations under the Kyoto protocol. It also says thing constructive from them for a change on that it will build on existing bilateral and multilat- what we might actually do. The broken re- eral initiatives. cord keeps on going round and round and the I am pleased that Mr Albanese can see what lack of any positive contribution remains the Senator Lundy and Mr Beazley obviously same, day in, day out. cannot. I noted with some interest in Senator We need to put this debate into some sort Lundy’s comments about the Labor Party’s of perspective. We know that the surface views in relation to these matters. I thought it temperature of our planet changes all the would be of interest to bring to the attention time. The well-regarded National Academy of the Senate the Asia-Pacific climate pact of Sciences in the United States has done which we have formed with the US, China, significant research on this topic. From the India, Japan and Korea. It was signed in 1890s to the 1940s, there was a warming Laos by the foreign minister. It covers about trend. From the 1940s to the 1970s, there 50 per cent of the world’s population and was actually a cooling. Then from the 1970s around 44 per cent of the greenhouse emis- on, there has been significant warming again. sions globally. When Senator Lundy regaled In total, across the changing trends there has us with the Labor Party’s concerns in relation been a 0.6 degree increase in the last 100 to the environment and greenhouse gases, years. she neglected to tell us that her party is so The Greens will never acknowledge that bereft of any ideas in relation to this that greenhouse occurs naturally. It is likely that man-made pollution is also contributing to

CHAMBER 112 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 the greenhouse effect. But the reality is that major emitters. We are not running around we do not know that for sure. We need to do supporting an agreement that is not sup- more work to establish whether that is the ported by the major emitters around the reality and, if it is the reality, what the effect world but, in a constructive approach, engag- on our climate will be into the future. There ing with those who are emitting a large is not scientific consensus on this. Eighty amount of greenhouse gas globally. leading academics and 25 meteorologists Senator BOB BROWN (Tasmania) (5.01 from across the world signed the 1997 Leip- pm)—Just let me reiterate what Senator zig Declaration, underscoring the fact that Milne said at the outset: 170-plus countries we are yet to reach a scientific consensus on have ratified Kyoto, including China and global warming. The declaration reads in India. The ignorance that comes from the part: government benches is sensational. It must We believe the Kyoto Protocol—to curtail carbon be appalling to listeners to hear in the dioxide emissions from only part of the world speeches that we have just heard from the community—is dangerously simplistic, quite government benches that that ignorance is ineffective, and economically destructive to jobs replacing what we would expect: informed and standards-of-living.... We consider the drastic debate and action and the nous to recognise emission control policies deriving from the Kyoto conference—lacking credible support from the the business investment that would come out underlying science—to be ill-advised and prema- of Australia being among the Kyoto ratifiers. ture. The conference in Montreal is for those There is not consensus in the scientific world countries that have ratified. Decent parts of about where we are at. But despite that, this the international community recognise that government has contributed and is contribut- we owe it to coming generations to act now ing some $1.8 billion towards what we see as and not stand aside but become part of a potentially quite a serious concern. Senator global move to really tackle this problem. Santoro referred to, for example, the $30.7 But Australia has stood out because it is dep- million going to the Australian climate uty sheriff to the Bush administration. Like change science program for ongoing climate President Bush, Prime Minister Howard has change research over the next four years. decided that the oil and coal industries are more important than the interests of our The world needs greenhouse gas emis- grandchildren. sions—on the basis of those who believe it is now fundamentally a man-made issue—to I congratulate Senator Milne on bringing come down by roughly 50 per cent this cen- this extremely critical motion before the tury. Under the Kyoto greenhouse gas emis- Senate. Senator Milne, as Vice-President of sions agreement, they will rise by 40 per the World Conservation Union and a member cent. So here is this marvellous agreement of the International Union for the Conserva- being lauded by the Greens which will actu- tion of Nature, will participate in the Mont- ally see an increase in greenhouse gas emis- real debate, taking part in constructive moves sions. We know that Australia emits only 1.4 by the world to tackle this awesome problem per cent of the world’s greenhouse gases. which like a spectre hangs across the future Anything that is going to work in the future of the whole of humanity and all our fellow has to engage all major emitters, and that is species on this planet. Because of the perfidy why we believe the Asia-Pacific pact is an of the government in signing the protocol but extremely important part of engaging the refusing to ratify, Senator Milne will be representing Australia at this conference, while

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 113 our so-called minister for the environment, ASIO, ASIS and DSD of the operations, ef- Senator Ian Campbell, will be outside and fectiveness and implications of ASIO’s ques- only able to observe and criticise from the tioning and detention powers. This review is margins. a fulfilment of the requirement in section 29 As the world works out how it is going to of the Intelligence Services Act that the deal with gas trading emissions coming out committee review the operations of this proof Kyoto worth $3 trillion and a clean devel- vision three years after its implementation opment mechanism with business, including and prior to the activation of the sunset another $3 trillion, Australia will be locked clause in July 2006. The recommended con- outside. Who will be talking about jobs, tinuation of the sunset clause and the accom- business, the environment and the future of panying committee review is a reflection of this beautiful country—this wonderful sunny the seriousness with which the parliament country the virtues and potential of which we viewed these powers. should be extolling? We have to keep it on ASIO provided the committee with a sub- this side with the Greens, and our hopes have stantial and comprehensive classified sub- to go with Senator Milne to Montreal be- mission detailing the operations of the pow- cause this government has failed. It is locked ers over a three-year period. The committee outside and has observer status when it is most grateful for this information, which it should be in the thick of things, representing found immensely important to its under- the 20 million people of this country. (Time standing of the operations of the act. Under expired) subsection (7) of the act, ASIO requested the The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT removal of some matters from the commit- (Senator Kirk)—Order! The time for dis- tee’s report which the committee viewed as cussion of the matter of public importance important. There were, however, two in- has expired. stances where ASIO insisted on deletions and where the committee did not agree with COMMITTEES ASIO’s view that the matters constituted a ASIO, ASIS and DSD Committee matter of national security. The committee Report does, however, recognise that, under the act, Senator FERGUSON (South Australia) ASIO has the right to insist on deletions (5.04 pm)—On behalf of the Parliamentary from the committee’s reports prior to tabling. Joint Committee on ASIO, ASIS and DSD, I Of more substantial importance are the present the report of the committee entitled committee’s findings in relation to the opera- ASIO’s questioning and detention powers— tions of division 3 of part III. ASIO has used review of the operation, effectiveness and its questioning powers under warrant 14 implications of division 3 part III in the Aus- times over the period of the review. It has tralian Security Intelligence Organisation never used its detention powers at all. No Act 1979. I seek leave to move a motion in request for a warrant was rejected by either relation to the report. the Attorney-General or the issuing authority. Leave granted. All subjects of warrants have had access to Senator FERGUSON—I move: legal advisers, although not all subjects have used legal advisers for the whole period of That the Senate take note of the report. their questioning. No legal representatives It is with pleasure that I present the review were removed on the grounds of disrupting by the Joint Parliamentary Committee on proceedings. All applications for financial

CHAMBER 114 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 assistance made to the Attorney-General’s not believe that the questioning was directed Department have been granted. at the purpose of the legislation—that is, to ASIO has complied with both the act and gather intelligence that is important in rela- the protocol in relation to the general con- tion to a terrorism offence or to prevent duct of the questioning—that is, it has ad- planned terrorist attacks. They described hered to the laws and regulations in relation much of the questioning as relating to his- to the periods of questioning, the granting of torical circumstances with no connection to breaks, the allowing of prayer times and the any imminent terrorist threat. They claimed explanation of the procedures to the subject that some questioning was not designed to et cetera. The Inspector-General of Intelli- elicit information, as that information was gence and Security or someone from his of- already in ASIO’s possession, but, rather, to fice has attended the first day of all question- create an offence under the questioning war- ing warrants. All questionings have been rant. videotaped and transcribed and all video- Another area was the right of lawyers to tapes and transcripts have been provided to intervene. In circumstances where questions the office of the inspector-general. The appeared to be improper, lawyers believed committee also had an opportunity to view they should have a right to intervene. There videotapes and transcripts for the first eight were problems associated with the right to warrants, but not the last six. The nature of use interpreters. Interpreters were refused on the questioning was described by the Inspec- some occasions. Where the period of ques- tor-General of Intelligence and Security as tioning had been extended for those using ‘professional and appropriate’ and ‘the sub- interpreters, there was a danger that this jects of warrants were treated with humanity might inhibit a subject from asking for the and respect for human dignity’, even in the use of one, even where that might have been face of ‘abusive and evasive comments’. The advisable. There were also claims of prejudi- prescribed authority described the nature of cial reporting in the media about people sub- the questioning as ‘questions merely to get ject to questioning warrants whose right of information’ rather than cross-examination. reply was curtailed by the secrecy provisions There have been no complaints made by of the act. These complaints were central to the subjects of warrants to the Federal Court the debate during the inquiry and have in- or the Ombudsman. However, some com- formed the committee’s subsequent recom- plaints about the process were made to the mendations. inspector-general and the committee. I will A number of the committee’s recommen- outline a couple of those. First, there was the dations were supported by the inspector- question of the lack of specificity in the war- general and were regarded as reasonable by rants—was there sufficient information to officials from ASIO and the Attorney- guide the prescribed authority in his supervi- General’s Department during the inquiry. sion of the questioning and the lawyer in his These recommendations include clarification advice to his client, and to ensure that the in the drafting of the legislation, particularly questioning stayed within the purpose for between the conditions applying to detention which it was intended? As to the nature and warrants and those applying to questioning purpose of the questioning, some lawyers only warrants; clarification and codification claimed that some of the questioning would of the role of legal representatives—the right in normal circumstances draw an objection within the statute to a legal representative for from a lawyer as being improper. They did a questioning warrant, the right of the legal

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 115 representative to intervene under defined the legislation when it is re-enacted next circumstances and the right to confidential year. communication with their clients under a I commend the report to the Senate. In do- questioning warrant; an improvement in the ing so I want to dissociate myself from two capacity of the prescribed authority to super- paragraphs that are included in this report. vise the questioning through greater informa- During the period of the review I was the tion being provided to him about the purpose acting committee chair in the absence of Mr of the warrant; and an improvement in both David Jull, who had sick leave for some six appeals and complaints mechanisms. months. As such, I was responsible for the The committee has also asked that the se- draft report that went to our committee for crecy provisions be re-examined, that penal- consideration. The committee approved a ties for breaches be made standard, that the report which, of course, then goes to the definition of ‘operational information’ for the agency for clearance. purposes of the secrecy provisions be nar- ASIO, as I said earlier, has a right to insist rowed, that greater disclosure be possible on on some deletions. I was not available when questioning only warrants and that the pre- the final toing-and-froing was done between scribed authority be given some decision- the department and the committee on the making power in relation to disclosure under words that were to be included. They insisted the secrecy provisions. that two parts of the report be deleted, and The committee took a great deal of evi- then some paragraphs were inserted which I dence from the Muslim community on the do not think reflect my views, although they implications of the legislation for them. They may reflect the views of the committee. I do expressed concern that the impact on them not believe that they were removed under was negative and that it had created appre- protest, as it says here, because I do not think hension and a sense that they had to prove we have a right to protest against something their innocence. Particular concerns were that ASIO has a legal obligation and right to expressed about intolerant and inflammatory do—that is, to make a judgment about mat- remarks aired on talkback radio. The Muslim ters of national security. I certainly would community believes that all leaders— not attribute words such as ‘a violation of government ministers and officials, members duty’ where the committee has that statutory of parliament, community leaders and jour- responsibility. That is in 1.38. In 1.73 there is nalists—have a responsibility, as far as they the deletion of a table. I do not think there is can and consistent with freedom of speech, a need for us to highlight in a report the fact to contain inflammatory remarks within the that ASIO has requested the deletion of a community. table. Even though the committee did not Finally, the committee acknowledged and feel that it was a matter of national security, accepted the view put to it by almost all wit- it is not for us to decide. Apart from that, I nesses that the powers within division 3 of commend the report to the Senate. I would part III were extraordinary powers that particularly like to thank the secretariat, un- should remain on the statute book only as der the secretary Margaret Swieringa, for long as necessary. Therefore, the committee their hard work. We have had a very busy believes that the sunset clause, albeit over a year. The work of the secretariat has been longer time frame, must be reinserted into outstanding in all of that time. (Time expired)

CHAMBER 116 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (5.15 6.38 There are, however, for the foreseeable fu- pm)—I will not take up the full time that is ture, threats of possible terrorist attacks in Austra- available to speak on the report of the Joint lia. Committee on ASIO, ASIS and DSD. Sena- 6.39 Some people in Australia might be inclined tor Ray is the person who would normally or induced to participate in such activity. speak now. He has participated in the inquiry 6.40 It is valuable to monitor such people, into ASIO’s questioning and detention pow- through ASIO’s various intelligence gathering ers. However, Senator Ray is not here. But methods, to seek to prevent such possible actions. the report does deserve some mention from 6.41 The questioning regime set up under Divi- the opposition. This is a significant report sion 3 Part III has been useful in this regard. dealing with ASIO’s questioning and deten- I will not go through all of the conclusions. tion powers. It is the review of the operation, I think that it is helpful to outline the ex- effectiveness and implications of division 3, cellent work of the committee. I cannot say part III of the Australian Security Intelli- that I am speaking on behalf of Senator Ray, gence Organisation Act 1979. because he does not know I am doing this, Perhaps Senator Ray would not have gone but I am sure he will read my comments at to this section first but, given that he is not some other time. I think he would want me here, I can. The section on the operation of to thank the committee secretariat, the chair the legislation, at 1.1, starts with Senator Ray and the acting chair for their valuable input questioning Mr Richardson, then ASIO chief, and work to ensure that this was done well. It for want of a better title. Senator Ray said: has certainly been exhaustive. Putting aside the question of the sunset clause, in The other couple of points I want to go to giving evidence today are you arguing for any are the recommendations. It is instructive in increased powers in the existing legislation ... some regard to look at the recommendations. Mr Richardson said no. Mr McDonald, who I could perhaps juxtapose this with the Sen- is from the executive of the government, ate Legal and Constitutional Legislation said: Committee report on the provisions of the With us, the answer is no as well. In fact, the Anti-Terrorism Bill (No. 2) 2005. When you amendments we included in our submission are look at that report and this report you see that about clarifying the powers probably in the direc- both are effectively majority reports. In this tion of the rights of the individual. instance, it is a unanimous report on the Senator Ray then said to the director-general: ASIO questioning regime. The Legal and ... you are satisfied that the existing powers equip Constitutional Legislation Committee tabled you to do the job you need to do? a majority report from Labor and the coali- Mr Richardson answered in the affirmative. tion senators. To look at what this report provides, it is Three recommendations on the ASIO perhaps instructive to go to the conclusions. questioning regime and detention powers The conclusions highlight, I suspect for eve- really highlight the direction that Labor, Lib- ryone, the changed environment that we now eral and National senators agree on. At rec- live in. The conclusions in part state: ommendation 19 the committee recommends: 6.37 There is no state of emergency in Australia in the strict legal sense of the concept. Section 34Y be maintained in Division 3 Part III of the ASIO Act 1979, but be amended to en-

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 117 compass a sunset clause to come into effect on Committee, which, in its recommendations 22 November 2011 ... on the antiterrorism bill, sought to ensure So it effectively provides for a sunset of that there is Ombudsman oversight. these powers. It further says: I am comforted that at least it seems to be Paragraph 29(1)(bb) of the Intelligence Ser- the position, if not of Mr Ruddock, of the vices Act 2001 be amended to require the Parlia- coalition Liberal and National Party senators mentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and in this place, as it is of Labor, that there Security to review the operations, effectiveness should be sunset provisions in this type of and implications of the powers in Division 3 Part legislation, that it should be reviewed and III and report to the Parliament on 22 June 2011. that there should be strengthened oversight. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on The report, I think, strengthens the position ASIO, ASIS and DSD is seeking an effective that the Senate Legal and Constitutional Leg- safeguard to be placed in the legislation be- islation Committee sought to make in its rec- cause it is important not only to review but ommendations on the provisions of the Anti- also to have a sunset provision in legislation. Terrorism Bill (No. 2). Further, in order to That also accords with the direction that the strengthen safeguards and oversight the Par- Legal and Constitutional Legislation Com- liamentary Joint Committee on ASIO, ASIS mittee took on the provisions of the antiter- and DSD, at the second dot point of recom- rorism bill. It also came to the conclusion mendation 10, recommends: that it is important to have that sunset provi- ASIO be required to provide a copy of the state- sion. Strangely, it picked the same period, ment of facts and grounds on which the warrant which is five years, as being a reasonable was issued to the prescribed authority before time in which legislation can run. Also, over questioning commences. a five-year period there might be changed That is one more of those additional factors circumstances that would warrant a review needed to ensure that there is clarity and cer- of the operation, effectiveness and implica- tainty. There should be a clear statement of tions. There should be another look at facts about what ASIO is requiring. They whether that power is still required, whether should have to provide that copy so that the environment has changed or whether there is no doubt for the person who is being other circumstances have come about. served. The other area which is also instructive is That same thread also seems to run in recommendation 12 of the report on ASIO through the Legal and Constitutional Legis- questioning and detention—that is, the lation Committee’s examination of the provi- unanimous report of the Liberals, Labor and sions of the antiterrorism bill. The same re- The Nationals. The committee recommends: quirement is suggested in the area of preven- ... an explicit right of access to the State Om- tative detention and control orders. Moving budsman, or other relevant State body, with juris- away from requiring just a summary of diction to receive and investigate complaints grounds, the Legal and Constitutional Legis- about the conduct of State police officers be pro- lation Committee report into the antiterror- vided. ism bill sought the inclusion of greater trans- In other words, that ensures that there is a parency so that the respondent could be cer- right of access to the Ombudsman. It is im- tain—or at least certain as far as national portant to ensure that there is an oversight security implications would allow—of the role. I again juxtapose that with the findings grounds for the order by having more than of the Legal and Constitutional Legislation

CHAMBER 118 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 simply a summary of grounds. The commit- be the case—that that broad representation of tee suggested that they have a statement of community and parliamentary views is not facts or reasons so that they could respond to on the committee. Equally seriously, I would them and provide them to the relevant people say that there is a case, even though I have helping them to respond. not served on the committee, to argue that Recommendation 7 of the Parliamentary perhaps it should be larger. It is getting more Joint Committee on ASIO, ASIS and DSD and more responsibilities and it has only report recommends that communications seven people on it between a lawyer and his or her client be Senator Ferguson—It has nine now. recognised as confidential—in other words, Senator BARTLETT—There you go— that client confidentiality be recognised. my viewpoint has been presciently antici- Similarly, from the Legal and Constitutional pated. I think Senator Ray is the only Labor Legislation Committee the same thread senator currently on the original committee. I comes through where it has sought to ensure do not criticise him for this, but obviously he that legal professional privilege is provided has been otherwise engaged for some time. for in the antiterrorism bill. So there is broad The chair of the committee has also been ill agreement, and it is comforting to see that for some time. That in itself shows the im- the Liberal-National coalition have also portance of having a wide range of people. sought to join in the direction that the Legal Whilst I am sure that Senator Ferguson is and Constitutional Legislation Committee quite capable of carrying the load, having a took. It is pleasing to see that they have wider range of people and perspectives on come to our position, and that is very helpful what are clearly very important matters is in making our case. When we see the antiter- important. And I do emphasise the impor- rorism bill— (Time expired) tance of having people from parties other Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (5.25 than the two major parties on the committee. pm)—I will try to be brief to ensure there is I say that particularly because I noted, af- sufficient time for another speaker; I shall ter the recent public debate we had about the not use up all my time. The Democrats have special recall of the Senate and the police not yet had the opportunity to fully read the raids a few days later, that there was quite a report that has been tabled. From an initial lot of commentary from some sections of the scanning of it, I believe the committee has print media suggesting that these sorts of done a reasonably thorough job. Obviously, intelligence matters were not ones that par- it has provided quite a few recommenda- ties like the Democrats or Greens should tions—19 recommendations—and that dem- have the right be involved in, because we onstrates the importance of ongoing parlia- were not mature and responsible enough and mentary scrutiny of these sorts of matters. were too prone to make hysterical comments But I have to make the point—I have and those sorts of things. Obviously, I found made it many times, and pretty much every those assessments fairly personally offen- time a report from this committee gets ta- sive. But more widely they reflect a very bled—that by law there is no Democrat rep- dangerous viewpoint, which is that somehow resentative on this committee, and neither is or other these are matters for only certain there a Greens or Independent representative people or perspectives and that, just because on it. I have a repeated concern—which you have a political or philosophical view makes me think even more that it should not that is at odds with the government or the

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 119 two major parties of the day, you should not marks for the moment to enable others to be able to participate in the scrutiny of these make a brief contribution. sorts of issues. That is a dangerous senti- Senator BOB BROWN (Tasmania) (5.31 ment, quite frankly. pm)—I thank the Joint Committee on ASIO, To go to the substance of the report, I ASIS and DSD for the report. In the couple want to emphasise the importance of the of minutes available I note that the report is a feedback that Senator Ferguson indicated review of the operation, effectiveness and was received from the Muslim community. I implications of the relevant parts of the have spoken on this issue a number of times ASIO Act 1979, the amendments made a in this chamber. It is obviously a particularly couple of years ago, and that one page of the pertinent issue at the moment, given the 283-page report is devoted to outcomes and other legislation that this chamber will be usefulness. As Senator Ferguson noted, there debating shortly to further extend security are two deletions from the report, under pro- powers. We need to heed those concerns very test, at the request of ASIO that he did not genuinely and, I believe, do much more of a agree with. This raises an extremely serious concrete nature to try to address them. matter for the parliament. Who is to make The recent Legal and Constitutional Af- the judgment about what ultimately the pub- fairs Legislation Committee report did have lic may see? Is it to be the elected representa- one recommendation that went specifically tives of the public who employ ASIO or is it to that matter, but on a quick reading I do not ASIO telling the elected representatives of see a recommendation around that in this the public what the public can or cannot see? report. It may be that the committee felt that Ultimately, a committee like this, which has it was outside their immediate terms of refer- an enormous responsibility, has to be the ence and they did not make recommenda- authority. tions on it, but I think it is an important area. Senator Ferguson—No. It is a key part of the broader goal, which we Senator BOB BROWN—Senator Fergu- all share, of minimising risk to the commu- son says no. I say yes. There is a false view nity from people who might consciously do here—which is not shared by the Congress it harm. If a section of the community such of the United States—that the intelligence as the Muslim community feel that the laws agencies ultimately have to make judgments are being implemented or are at risk of being about what the elected representatives of administered in a way that unfairly targets parliament may or may not see. That is our innocent members of their community then job. That is our responsibility. That is not the that will not only be unfair for those innocent bailiwick of the representatives of the secret people but I think will have a wider, more intelligence agencies. When I see in a report dangerous and counterproductive impact on like this that a sentence has been removed the overall goal of the legislation. under protest at the request of ASIO that says I welcome the fact that Senator Ferguson to me that the members of the committee drew attention to that in his tabling com- removed that because ASIO was protesting. I ments and I would like to reaffirm the impor- do not agree that the outcome there should tance of the wider community and politicians have been as it was. We get what is effec- in general listening to and hearing that per- tively a blacked-out part of the report on spective. With that, I might cease my re- page 172, which says, ‘A table has been removed at the request of ASIO.’ Really?

CHAMBER 120 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

There has to be much greater consideration I present the 13th and 14th reports of 2005 of of how we as a parliament take our responsi- the Senate Standing Committee for the Scru- bility to the 20 million people of Australia tiny of Bills. I also present Scrutiny of Bills who put us here. I reiterate: intelligence Alert Digest No. 14 of 2005, dated 30 No- agencies are here at the direction of this par- vember 2005. liament; it is not the other way round. A great Ordered that the reports be printed. deal might be learnt from looking at the AUDITOR-GENERAL’S REPORTS practices of the United States Congress, which is much more fearless in defending the Report No. 18 of 2005-06 public interest against the great danger that The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT intelligence— (Senator Kirk)—In accordance with the Senator Ferguson—You hate the Ameri- provisions of the Auditor-General Act 1997, cans! You hate President Bush! I present the following report of the Auditor- General: Audit report No. 18 of 2005-06: Senator BOB BROWN—That is differ- Performance Audit: Customs compliance ent. The member interjects and says that I assurance strategy for international cargo. hate America. That is absolutely untrue. I love the country. I have been there many Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (5.36 times. He then says that I do not like Presi- pm)—by leave—The report examines the dent Bush. Well, he is on the money. That is Australian Customs Service and its role in how a democracy should work. There are protecting the community from prohibited things about the American democracy which imports. These imports include such things we could learn from. We should have a bill as illegal drugs, child pornography and other of rights—we do not. We should have the offensive material. They can also include freedom for people to move from one side of guns, knives of certain types that are prohib- parliament to the other instead of voting en ited and other weapons, counterfeit goods bloc, but we do not. and—when Customs acts in conjunction with AQIS—diseased or otherwise undesirable Senator Ferguson—How often do the plants and animals or plant or animal prod- Greens split? ucts that should not be allowed into this Senator BOB BROWN—It would be an country. excellent thing if the rude and out of order In addition, Customs also ensures that the interjecting government representative were correct amount of duty is paid on inbound to understand that the Americans have a goods. In order to do this, and to protect the much more fearless ability in their represen- community from illegal products, Customs tatives to tackle intelligence agencies and to needs information from the importing indus- stand up for the wider public interest in a try for each import. This type of information democracy and not to be cowed by them, as includes but is not limited to: the country the appears to be the case in this report. I seek imported goods are coming from, the con- leave to continue my remarks later. tainer number, who they are coming from Leave granted; debate adjourned. and going to and when and by what means Scrutiny of Bills Committee they are arriving—by boat or air. To get this Report information, the agency uses the Customs Senator EGGLESTON (Western Austra- Compliance Assurance Strategy. That is ef- lia) (5.35 pm)—On behalf of Senator Mason, fectively what the ANAO, as set out in its report, has audited. However, this audit does

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 121 not cover the period of the Howard govern- ... the audit planning process was often based on ment’s botched introduction of the import officer knowledge, experience and intuition and side of the cargo management re-engineering did not include a formal assessment of risks or the project. It does cover the export side, how- level of confidence in the client’s ability to com- ever, and there it finds that the troubled sys- ply. tem has: This problem also carries over to compliance ... a number of system defects; incorrect reporting activities relating to licensed premises, practices; and deficiencies within Customs’ sup- where the ANAO found: port arrangements. Most warehouses and depots were risk rated al- That is what the Audit Office said before though Customs advised that, for some, this rat- ing was more intuitive than analytical. considering the botched introduction of the new import system that slows down trade So we have a situation in which formal as- and, in some instances, sends clearances sessments are often not undertaken and risk from the computer age back to the age of pen assessment for warehouses and depots is and paper. Considering the terrible farce of based on intuition. This is another failure of the imports system implementation, it is little the Howard government on border protec- wonder that the ANAO included a review of tion. It means Customs is not collecting in- the imports phase as a potential audit topic. telligence that could be used to build on and Given the scale of the mess, Labor believes improve risk profiles. They seem to be based that the Auditor-General should do just that. on intuition. Is it any wonder that the ANAO found: Leaving that issue aside for the moment, the next one in the audit report is yet another ... there has not been a systematic analysis of the failure of Customs IT. This time, the problem results of compliance activity at the operational and tactical levels to identify risks and emerging seems to lie with a different computer sys- trends. tem, the Examination Data Management System, known as EXAMS. Under this sys- In addition, there is a problem with Customs’ tem, the ANAO found examination and in- internal audit processes—that is, that they do spection data is not properly tracked. The not have enough resources to do them. The effect of that is enormous. It means, to quote massive cost blow-out of the integrated cargo from the report: system has led to cutbacks in auditing and accountability. The intelligence functions in ... Customs does not analyse or effectively use the this area are also undermined by what the data retained in the EXAMS system or regional databases. ANAO report described as the ‘fragmented’ approach by Customs to intelligence, feed- There are other problems as well. The back and support. The feedback that compli- ANAO found that the EXAMS system: ance assurance teams provided to the risk ... does not record the workgroup requesting the identification and intelligence branch was examination and the business rules and proce- described in the report as: dures do not clearly define how positive finds are to be recorded. Compliance Assurance teams provide little feedback to RI&I analysts on any of the work they That was the assessment of the real-time undertake or the compliance activities completed compliance activity. In respect of the post as part of the CCAS. transaction compliance activity, the report CCAS is the Customs Compliance Assurance also stated: Strategy.

CHAMBER 122 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

The audit also concluded that Customs is ters as being fairly dry and not very impor- simply not keeping accurate and reliable data tant, exciting or significant. But this report, I for use in evaluations of the effectiveness of think, highlights not only why the roles of the compliance assurance. The report con- the Auditor-General and the Audit Office are cluded: so important and valuable but why we should ... accurate and reliable data is not readily avail- all pay a bit more attention to some of these able or being used to evaluate the effectiveness of matters. CCAS compliance activities or as a basis for As Senator Ludwig has just outlined, Au- management decisions. dit report No. 18, Customs compliance as- I will finish with another quote from the re- surance strategy for international cargo, port: basically demonstrates that serious inade- The ANAO found that Customs’ ability to target quacies in the customs arena are leaving non-compliance is undermined by a lack of sys- Australia at risk. It is fairly ironic that this tematic analysis of risks and emerging trends. The debate follows the tabling of a report about intelligence support being provided to the CCAS our ASIO laws and, of course, is in the con- is also reduced by inadequate feedback mecha- text of debates we will be having in this nisms and information sharing. Customs intelli- chamber quite soon about further very sig- gence capacity would be enhanced if compliance activities were evaluated and the results of these nificant changes to the law to increase the activities fed into intelligence assessments. powers of police and intelligence officers to manage some of these risks. Customs is The Customs Service agrees with every rec- about risks a lot wider than just terrorism, ommendation in this report which, I have to but some of those issues overlap, particularly say, is pleasing to hear. Yet until this is recti- if you are talking about weapons and, I fied our community is at risk, because of the would argue, things like drugs, which can be slackness of the Minister for Justice and Cus- used to finance other unlawful activities and toms. The once proud Australian Customs the purchase of materials that can be used to Service is being ruined by the reign of an harm the community. incompetent minister. Finally, I look forward to the potential follow-up audit to review the There are quite genuine and direct links system in light of the introduction of the im- between the failures in the Customs area and port phase of ICS, the new integrated com- a lack of ability on the part of the govern- puter system that was introduced on 12 Oc- ment to do the concrete things that will im- tober. It will be instructive to see. I hope the prove the protection of the Australian com- auditor takes up his own suggestion and does munity. One’s mind turns to the reported the audit and reviews that side. comments a week or so ago of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and In- Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (5.44 digenous Affairs, Senator Vanstone, when pm)—Normally Senator Murray, rather than she talked, in the context of aeroplane secu- I, focuses on Auditor-General’s reports and, rity, about how a lot of the things that are indeed, on Customs issues for the Democ- done in relation to security are done to make rats. But I thought it was important to give people feel safer and they do not actually recognition to this report at the time of its have any substantive benefit in increasing tabling, because there is a bit of a tendency the level of community safety. amongst not all but many of us here, in the general public and in the press gallery to The flip side of that is that the government think of Auditor-General’s and Customs mat- is falling down in the areas in which there

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 123 are unspectacular things that could increase I urge people throughout the community community safety but do not get a lot of at- to look more seriously at these sorts of is- tention. We saw this a month or two ago in sues. Whilst I do not deny—let me hasten to the quite damning report into this govern- add—that security laws, whether we are talk- ment’s failure, four years after 11 September ing about ASIO or other things, may play a 2001, to get our airport security up to a de- role, and that we need to consider those is- cent standard. This is the same thing as we sues, we also should not forget some of the are seeing here with regard to Customs. They basic areas like Customs, airport security and are different sorts of issues, but they are ar- others where the government is clearly fal- eas that clearly link to the safety of the ling short of the mark. In this report—once community. They are not going to get head- again in the usual less than headline- lines, they are not spectacular, they are not grabbing phraseology but nonetheless fairly going to make people notice and feel safer, clear wording—the Audit Office has come like putting plastic knives in aeroplanes down with what I believe to be a less than might, but they will actually have a direct positive report on the activities in this area. impact on improving the real safety of the As Senator Ludwig said, the Audit Office community. What we see, as Senator Ludwig recommendations have been accepted, and has outlined, is that the government is falling that is a positive. But I know from my ex- short on the concrete stuff that matters. perience in the immigration arena that it is We are changing significantly, and facing one thing for a department to accept all the the likelihood of major reductions in, our recommendations of an audit report; it is personal freedoms and, I would argue, risk- another thing for them to be implemented in ing the undermining of the rule of law and a way that fixes the problem. That failed to the nature of our democracy, supposedly be- happen more than once in the immigration cause of this absolutely fierce and unyielding area. I hope it happens in the Customs area. commitment of the government to protect us Senator PAYNE (New South Wales) at all costs from the risk of terrorism and (5.50 pm)—It is my great pleasure to partici- other things. But, whilst we are doing this, pate in this discussion of the Auditor- we are falling short in something as funda- General’s report No. 18 of 2005-06: Customs mental for an island nation as Customs, compliance assurance strategy for interna- where we clearly need to be using world’s tional cargo. As senators across the chamber best practice. It is not even that we are not up have noted, I have long had an interest in this to speed with the latest technology; we are area. I chair the committee with this respon- falling short in the fundamentals of accurate sibility: the Senate Legal and Constitutional and reliable data not being readily available Legislation Committee. I think it is important or used, the fundamentals of having a frag- to place a couple of points on the record. The mented approach to intelligence feedback ANAO audit of the Customs compliance and the fundamentals of adequate resourcing. assurance strategy for international cargo Even though the area is Customs and people found: might think that it is tedious and dull— Customs adopts an appropriate risk management despite the dynamic shadow spokesperson, approach and has developed and implemented Senator Ludwig, trying to make it far more systems and processes to risk assess and target exciting—it is actually a fundamental part of high-risk consignments and non-compliant behav- making the community safer. iour. The report further found:

CHAMBER 124 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Intervention strategies to address non-compliance rigorous cargo reporting time frames which are tailored to the nature and extent of the risk were introduced by the government in Janu- involved. ary this year. So Customs has worked with The report, in its substance, also acknowl- those reporters to assist in improving their edged the initiatives that Customs is putting performance as part of its cargo reporting in place ‘to strengthen its targeting and risk strategy. That, most importantly, is a strategy identification strategies’. It acknowledged which involves both education and aware- the development of ‘improved intelligence ness raising for all the stakeholders. Follow- and information sharing arrangements’ and ing what is described as an initial morato- the work being done to improve data integ- rium period, there will be new provisions rity. I am sure all of us are very pleased to available as of mid-April next year which see the initiatives that Customs has taken will enable Customs to impose penalties on being acknowledged by the ANAO in this cargo reporters who continue to fail to meet report. the new reporting requirements. For the The report went on to make nine recom- benefit of the Senate, I think it is important mendations. I understand those recommenda- to note that cargo is never released from Cus- tions are probably best described as improv- toms’ control until such time as it has been ing the operating and administrative effec- reported and its risk adequately assessed. tiveness of the Customs compliance assur- In terms of other specific issues from the ance strategy. Customs have welcomed these report, I want to make a brief remark about recommendations, and I know how seriously the success rate of the mass screening of air as an organisation they take them. They have cargo. The current mass screening effort has agreed to implement the nine recommenda- detected: quarantine threats, and we all know tions and, most tellingly, have already begun how important it is for Australia as an island action to do just that. continent to deal most seriously with any Resourcing has been a key contributor to threats to quarantine—and if I did not know many of the issues that the auditors have that already, my colleague Senator Scullion identified. It was a decision of the 2005 would remind me regularly; prohibited im- budget to fund an additional 60 compliance ports, including some drugs; and importa- positions which is now in fact enabling Cus- tions which incurred either duty or GST. toms to address these issues in particular. Also in relation to the mass screening of air cargo, 100 per cent of general air cargo is There are a number of specific issues from subject to electronic profiling, and targets the report on which I would like to comment identified are physically examined in all briefly. The first of those concerns any dis- cases. This is a very intensive approach for cussion of cargo management re- Customs but a very important one for the engineering. It is important to note that the safety and security of the customs process. audit itself and the work that the ANAO has done is about the Customs Compliance As- In terms of post-transaction activity and surance Strategy and not CMR—that is, resourcing for that, the ANAO report has cargo management re-engineering. identified that the depletion of compliance resources was primarily due to them being In relation to the Cargo Reporting Com- redirected to community protection roles— pliance Strategy, the report separately con- the report makes that particularly clear, on firms that some cargo reporters are indeed about page 26—and not due to the result of having difficulty in complying with the more any issues surrounding cargo management

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 125 re-engineering. Any effort to indicate other- I thank the Senate for the opportunity and wise would be inaccurate. Again, in the ini- seek leave to continue my remarks. tiatives taken in the 2005-06 budget, the Leave granted; debate adjourned. government has addressed that issue by pro- DOCUMENTS viding the funding to which I referred earlier for the additional 60 compliance personnel Responses to Senate Resolutions whose role is to address these issues. That is The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT also acknowledged in the audit report. (Senator Kirk)—I present correspondence I commenced my brief remarks this eve- from the Chairman of the Australian Compe- ning by talking about the positives that the tition and Consumer Commission, Mr Sam- ANAO audit found in relation to the Cus- uel, responding to the resolutions of the Sen- toms Compliance Assurance Strategy. I think ate of 27 June and 12 November 2002 con- its identification of Customs having an ap- cerning tobacco. propriate risk management approach and Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (5.57 having implemented systems and processes pm)—by leave—I move: which risk assess and target those high-risk That the Senate take note of the document. consignments and non-compliant behaviour I realise people want to get on with legisla- is a very important part of their activity, tive debates, so I will keep my remarks short. which we note regularly in the Senate Legal Firstly, given this correspondence is the re- and Constitutional Legislation Committee sult of an order of this Senate, it is appropri- estimates environment in particular. Regard- ate to take note of it, particularly given that ing the determination of those intervention the orders were from June and November of strategies to address noncompliance, which 2002, so it has taken a while to get here. Ob- are tailored to the nature and extent of the viously, it is the sort of activity that takes a risk involved—and that is an intensive and bit of time, so I am not being critical, but, difficult process that Customs have pur- given the length of time involved in this in- sued—the report has acknowledged a num- vestigation, it has been comprehensive and ber of the other initiatives which Customs therefore, again, I think it is appropriate to have put in place. In the latter part of my take note of it. remarks concerning the specific issues from the report, I have referred to those. The original order for the production of this correspondence relating to tobacco was Customs have strengthened their targeting moved on behalf of the Australian Democ- and risk identification strategies. They have rats by Senator Lyn Allison. As many sena- worked hard on the development of im- tors would know, tobacco and its health con- proved intelligence and information-sharing sequences, its marketing and other related arrangements, and the work that is being issues, are issues that not just Senator Allison done to improve data integrity will support but also many others from the Democrats and enhance the operation of all of their sys- have put a lot of energy into and given a lot tems. As I said, nine recommendations were of priority to. Indeed, one of the very few made. Customs have agreed to implement all private senator’s bills that have ever been of those and have, indeed, begun action to do passed by this parliament since Federation— so. I think that is a mark of how seriously in over 100 years I think the total number is they take the ANAO report on the audit of in single figures—was introduced by a De- the Customs Compliance Assurance Strategy. mocrat senator, Senator Janet Powell, and

CHAMBER 126 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 was on tobacco advertising. It was a signifi- extra weight and clout in the area that it is cant landmark in bringing in much more sig- investigating. nificant restrictions on tobacco advertising. I Despite the government having, with its believe the time is right to go a bit further new-found majority in the Senate, a perfect with regard to that, but for its time—I think record since 1 July of opposing every single it was in about 1991 or 1992—it was a very motion before this Senate for any sort of or- significant advance. der for the production of documents, I hope Senator Allison would be more across the that the government at least acknowledges details regarding this than I am, but the in- the benefit of orders such as this that were vestigation of the Australian Competition passed by the Senate back in 2002. It has and Consumer Commission was important in been clearly shown to have been a valuable trying to ensure that the way that certain to- exercise—and let us not forget when we are bacco products are marketed and portrayed is talking about issues like this that we are not not misleading or likely to have adverse just talking about making ourselves feel bet- health consequences. Obviously, any sort of ter about slightly better behaviour that im- marketing of tobacco products is going to proves things for consumers; we are actually have adverse health consequences, because talking about saving people’s lives here. The tobacco is one of those products that is un- more we can reduce the number of people equivocally bad, not only for the people who who are hooked on tobacco or the more we consume it but for anybody who is regularly can at least ensure that people are fully in- exposed to it in the form of passive smoking. formed about any interaction they have with But it is nonetheless particularly important tobacco products, the more chance we have that we at least do all we can to minimise of saving lives and, of course, reducing the misleading portrayals of tobacco products. multibillion dollar cost that the wider com- That was, and indeed remains, a matter of munity and the taxpayer have to pay because concern to the Democrats, including Senator of the continued operations of the tobacco Allison. industry. I will not go into the detail of the corre- Question agreed to. spondence and all of the activities of the ANTI-TERRORISM BILL (No. 2) 2005 ACCC regarding this. Suffice to say that I First Reading think it is quite clear that the Democrats’ concerns were vindicated and that some as- Bill received from the House of Represen- pects of those concerns remain. I do believe tatives. it is also a good example of the role that the Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western Senate and the parliament can play in trying Australia—Minister for the Environment and to assist bodies such as the ACCC in their Heritage) (6.04 pm)—I move: important jobs of overseeing the activities of That this bill may proceed without formalities the corporate sector in particular and, indeed, and be now read a first time. all activities that impact on Australian con- Question agreed to. sumers. It can be of significant assistance to Bill read a first time. the commission in what can be highly fraught, politicised and contentious areas to Second Reading have the weight of a parliamentary request Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western behind it rather than being seen to act off its Australia—Minister for the Environment and own bat, because it gives the commission Heritage) (6.04 pm)—I move:

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 127

That this bill be now read a second time. This consultation process of almost 2 months has I seek leave to have the second reading been very constructive and has yielded the posi- speech incorporated in Hansard. tive result of an agreed position on the text of the bill introduced today. Leave granted. Control Orders and Preventative Detention The speech read as follows— Much of the discussion has focussed on the con- Earlier this month this Senate passed amendments trol orders and preventative detention regimes and to clarify the terrorist act offences in Part 5.3 of their extensive safeguards. the Criminal Code. Firstly, in considering whether to apply for or The Government has said publicly that it would issue a control order the personal circumstances like all elements of the Anti-Terrorism legislation of an individual will need to be balanced against package to become law before Christmas. the threat to the community. This second Bill contains the remaining provi- This does not mean that personal circumstances sions to ensure that we have the toughest laws will outweigh the assessment of the threat, but it possible to prosecute those responsible should a is recognised that both issues need to be taken terrorist attack occur. into account. Second and of equal importance the bill ensures Under the Control Order regime an “interim” we are in the strongest position possible, to pre- control order is made initially. The person the vent new and emerging threats; to stop terrorists subject of the order may attend the Court and carrying out their intended acts. make representations when the Court decides to This bill has been the subject of extensive consul- confirm, void or revoke the order. tation. The control order does not come into effect until This has included a reference to the Senate Legal the person is notified. and Constitutional Legislation Committee, which The person can apply for the order to be revoked, reported on the bill earlier this week. varied or declared void as soon as the person is As the Attorney indicated last night, the Govern- notified that an order has been confirmed. ment is giving close consideration to the recom- The person and their lawyer may have a copy of mendation of the Committee and the need for the grounds for making or varying the order. appropriate amendments. Under the preventative detention regime the or- The Prime Minister first announced the proposals der, as well as the treatment of the person de- to strengthen Australia’s counter-terrorism laws tained, would be subject to judicial review. on 8 September in advance of a special COAG There is also built in merits review including meeting. when the police seek a continued preventative The following day senior officials from the detention order. Commonwealth met with their State and Territory At that time the person detained or their legal counter-parts to discuss the proposals. representative can provide the police with addi- The special COAG meeting of 27 September tional information concerning the preventative provided an opportunity for the Prime Minister to detention order. discuss the proposals with Premiers and Chief The person detained may contact a lawyer or a Ministers who agreed that there was a clear case family member and employer. for laws to be strengthened. Each year, the Attorney-General would report to The COAG agreement was followed by extensive Parliament on the operation of preventative deten- consultation with the States and Territories at tion orders. officer level as well as directly between the Prime Minister and Premiers. The regime will not apply to people under 16 and special rules will apply for people between the

CHAMBER 128 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 ages of 16 and 18 and people incapable of manag- ately equipped to protect the Australian commu- ing their own affairs. nity. Advocating terrorism and sedition I commend the bill to the Senate. The bill also addresses those in our community Debate (on motion by Senator Ian who urge terrorist acts by expanding upon the Campbell) adjourned. Australian Government’s ability to proscribe terrorist organisations that advocate terrorism and Ordered that the resumption of the debate also updates the sedition offence. on this bill be an order of the day for a later hour. There has also been much discussion about the breadth and appropriateness of these provisions. WORKPLACE RELATIONS The updated sedition offence will address prob- AMENDMENT (WORK CHOICES) lems with those who urge violence directly BILL 2005 against other groups within our community. Second Reading The sedition amendments modernise the language Debate resumed. of the provisions—they are not a wholesale revision of the sedition offence. Senator LUDWIG (Queensland) (6.05 pm)—I continue from where I left off on the However, given the considerable interest in the provisions, I would like to assure the Parliament Workplace Relations Amendment (Work that a departmental review of the sedition of- Choices) Bill 2005, that the thrust of this fences will be conducted. reform is simple—to leave workers with lit- The bill also bolsters existing offences dealing tle or no minimum standard or safety net. with funding terrorist organisations and financing Without even looking at the unfair dismissal individual terrorists. changes, the reforms will fundamentally un- New measures will facilitate the tracking of ter- dermine the rights of all workers in Austra- rorist funds and also make it harder for terrorists lia. Ordinary workers know this, community to transfer funds across international borders. groups know this and church groups across Law Enforcement and ASIO powers Australia know this. The Howard govern- The bill extends the powers of police to stop ment seems to be deaf. Labor has and always question and search to all Commonwealth places will fight for the rights of workers and ordi- and prescribed security zones to safeguard against nary Australians. It is the basis on which this terrorism. party was formed more than 100 years ago, In addition, the bill provides AFP with a new no- and Labor will not give up the fight simply tice to produce regime to ensure compliance with because this extreme, power mad govern- lawful requests for certain types of information. ment plans to force its 1970s ideology onto a Finally the bill strengthens the regime relating to booming 21st century economy. Labor has ASIO’s powers, including enhancing various as- always fought for the rights of Australians pects of ASIO’s special powers warrant regime, and will continue to do so. access to aircraft and vessel information, the of- The government may have the numbers in fence for providing false or misleading informa- the Senate, but a majority is nothing com- tion under an ASIO questioning warrant. pared to the will of Australian people. The The bill also amends relevant customs legislation Australian public is saying, ‘We won’t stand to broaden customs powers for security and intel- for this.’ The government should listen to ligence purposes. that. The people are also saying: ‘We won’t These measures complement others taken by the stand to see our family time taken from us. Government to ensure that agencies are appropri- We won’t work for little, and we will not

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 129 give up our rights that have been fought for Now, after 9 years of the Howard Government, for the last 100 years.’ This is not the end of the veil has finally slipped. the debate today. The government has taken Now the unadulterated abuses of the trust the to quoting comments from every trade un- Australian people placed in this Government have ionist as though they were gospel Labor po- begun. sition. What goes around comes around, and And in doing so, now begins of the end for the the government should get its calculator Howard Government. ready, because every time a worker is dealt The Impacts of this Bill: with unfairly by an employer under this sys- The reality of this bill will be found around the tem Labor will be more than pleased to tally kitchen tables, in the backyards and on the patios them up and lay them directly at the gov- of Australia. ernment’s feet for the Liberals and The Na- This bill will shatter the corner stones of house- tionals to look at. But whatever abuse of hold budgets and quality time in ordinary family workers’ rights this extreme government puts life. into practice, the voice of the Australian We all know that Australian families are strug- people will ring loud and clear at the next gling to balance time with the kids and their part- election. Mr Howard is ignoring the voice ners as well as making ends meet at the end of the right now, but let us see what happens in week. 2007. His extreme ideology and his judg- It is no surprise that the average household spends ment and dismissal of Australian people’s $126 dollars for every $100 they earn just to try rights will cost him his government. (Time and make do. expired) The current industrial relations system has al- Senator WEBBER (Western Australia) lowed them to afford childcare, school fees, caring for ageing parents and the occasional day out. (6.07 pm)—I seek leave to incorporate Sena- tor Hutchins’s speech. The day to day reality of these issues make a mockery of the Prime Minister’s claim that real Leave granted. wages only increased by 1.4 per cent during La- Senator HUTCHINS (New South Wales) bor’s last term in office. (6.07 pm)—The incorporated speech read as That’s because in tackling the inflationary wage follows— price spiral, the Hawke-Keating Government kept faith with Australian families with a 40 per cent Introduction: real increase in the social wage. I rise to record the reasons for my opposition, and the opposition of my Party, to this bill. I can remember the struggles of the 1980s quite well, as I was a young union official working If we pass this bill its consequences will be ex- with workers in the transport industry. I can re- perienced in every yard, on every site, at every member the pain of the Accord, but also the secu- store, and in every factory in the Commonwealth. rity that came with it, the knowledge that if you And each of those workplaces, this Government fell sick or were out of work, that your kids and has now put on notice to every worker that their family would be taken care of. penalty rates, their safety rates, their protection But now that security has gone. We’ve been told from the sack and lockout and their right to a fair that it’s ‘user-pays’ from now on, and it’s not the minimum wage is now up for the chop. place of Government to secure a fair wage to There will be no mitigation, no fairness, no re- support a worker and their family, who now ought course and no justice in the industrial relations to make their own way in the world. system that this bill will impose. So, in so many respects, this legislation is the final chapter, the final nail in the coffin so to

CHAMBER 130 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 speak, of that great social compact the Hawke- in a couple of hours a week for the rest of the Keating Government established during its time year, then it’s bad luck to Billy. in office. It’s bad luck to Billy if he is currently paying off What workers will lose: his mortgage on overtime and the new agreement There are two levels of attacks against workers’ strikes out overtime. Billy losing his house is the pay and conditions contained in this bill. price of the new flexibility. At one level, there will be the loss of conditions It’s bad luck to Billy that he gets the sack for ‘op- on the shop floor, occasioned from upsetting the erational reasons’. He won’t have unfair dismissal balance between the needs of employees and em- protections anymore, and it’s bad luck to Billy ployers. that he has to spend his own time and money keeping up with training because an employer is At a much wider level, there will be a slashing of not obliged to provide this anymore. wages economy wide, because the Government is kicking out the award safety net out from under- The Working Poor: neath many workers and is radically altering the When I was chair of the Senate Community Af- way in which the minimum wage is calculated. fairs inquiry into poverty in Australia, I was I’ll discuss each of these impacts in turn. struck by the evidence that Australia is increasingly being split down the middle between the This bill will seek to slash the number of allow- haves and the have-nots. able matters under a Federal Award to just five matters: This was evidenced in the rise of the working poor in Australia—something that has never be- • Ordinary rates of pay fore been witnessed in the 100 years of our Fed- • Hours of work eration. • Annual leave There are now over 2.4 million Australians living • Sick Leave and in poverty despite at least one person in the household in which they live having a job. Two • Parental Leave key trends have been driving this—the growth of For a number of years the Government has been casualisation on one hand and the rise in unpaid out to cut the number of allowable matters in an overtime on the other. award—originally down from 20 to 13 and now Casualisation will only get worse under this legis- from 5. lation. Australia has the second highest rate of Allowable matters are important because they casualisation in the OECD, second only behind regulate a minimum standard of overtime Spain on 27 per cent. I would suggest to any right amounts, training entitlements, public holidays, thinking person that over 1 in 4 workers being termination, types of employment and the like. casual is as about as flexible as you want. They provide certainty for employees, knowing Even so the Government’s claims that the work- that if they have to work late for instance, they force is not sufficiently flexible evaporates in an will receive a fair reward for doing so. instant in the face of that data. Now imagine you are “Billy”—the worker who But what we will now have is a situation where figured so prominently in the Government’s $55 an employer can call people in for 2 and 3 hours million dollar dud of Liberal Party advertising. of work, not paying them penalty rates, and then Billy’s agreement removes many of the twenty telling them to go home. They could well lose provisions of current awards in just one sentence. more money in childcare and petrol costs in get- It says that overtime, leave, public holidays and ting to the job. the like are all encompassed in the ordinary hours If they refuse the work, then they can get the and salary of work. Full stop. No ambiguity. sack, no questions asked. That means if Billy is told to work 10 hour days, It’s no secret that cutting penalty rates and hours 7 days a week for six months and then only come of work is only going to increase casualisation,

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 131 which the Community Affairs Committee noted is allegedly ‘too complex for business’—surely was the main reason for the growth in the work- doing a few sums can’t be that hard! ing poor. This will be the real evil behind the legislation, as The second surprising issue was the massive ordinary workers, especially vulnerable casuals growth in the amount of unpaid overtime worked and those with low skills, are shunted into AWA’s by employees. Over one third of workers reported once their collective agreement’s expire, they will recently working unpaid overtime, and that that see a real loss in their take home pay—all in the unpaid overtime was often worked on a regular name of flexibility. basis. Minimum Wage Setting: So not only does this turn the balance between There is a second, wider set of attacks that this work and family on its head, but it’s clear that bill has on the wages and conditions of Australian many employers are taking advantage of the job workers. insecurity that many workers now face. By strik- Those attacks are contained in the provisions ing out overtime, the Government will only fur- governing the Orwellian Fair Pay Commission ther this trend. and the method of setting the minimum wage. This also then calls into question how this legisla- John Howard has been parroting the line that we tion is going to create jobs at the level of the mi- are to trust him on his record. cro-economy. Surely employers will now just be able to direct workers to continue on after their But the record is that in 4 of the last 8 Govern- shift has finished, rather than actually hiring ment submissions to the national minimum wage casuals or more staff. The logic of the Govern- case, the Government argued for an increase be- ment’s approach simply does not add up. low the rate of inflation—a net decrease in real wages. AWA’s and the No-Disadvantage Test: Moreover, the difference between the Govern- A related trend has been the insidious growth of ment’s submission and the fair level as deter- AWA’s in sectors where employees are tradition- mined by the AIRC was over $50 per week or a ally vulnerable—often in low skill service indus- difference of $2600 per year. tries. So it’s quite clear that John Howard really says Now a common law contract might be appropri- one thing and does another. ate for a highly skilled professional, but the experience of AWA’s in the hospitality and service The Government won’t bear the political odium sector shows they are just a tool to drive down that will come from its desire to drive down wages and conditions. wages and the cost of labour—that’s why it has passed the buck to the Fair Pay Commission. A joint study by 151 Academics noted that with successive AWA’s: That Commission will turn the tradition of cen- tralised wage setting in Australia on its head. ‘in the first and second periods, penalty rates Since the Harvester judgement, wages have been were abolished all together in 54 per cent and 44 set on the basis of a fair remuneration for em- per cent of cases respectively, and overtime rates ployment, not the employer’s capacity to pay. were abolished in 40 and 44 per cent of cases’ Now the Fair Pay Commission will be told to The Democrats’ thirty pieces of silver was the ‘no address employability as an issue in determining disadvantage test’, which held that no AWA could wages—code for what employers consider af- contain terms which on total balance were less fordable. To understand the reasons for this you that were what were protected by the award. have to delve into the John Howard’s tortured No such guarantees exist for AWA’s under the ideological heritage. new legislation. Naturally, there won’t be much John Howard recently described low wages as an left in awards for AWA’s to be measured against, ‘article of faith’ for him and his Government. I but that no disadvantage test is going, because it say low wages because those opposite are pent up with a belief that low wages are connected in an

CHAMBER 132 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 exact bouncing-ball arrangement with high em- fully encapsulates the indecency of this legisla- ployment. tion, as to label something extreme implies it This may have been true in the factories of a never the less has continuity with what went be- Dickensian novel, but it is certainly not true in the fore it. contemporary post-industrial Australian economy. There is no continuity between this bill and the There are a number of factors that govern levels past 100 years of wage determination in this of employment, especially demand but also the country. That system survived oil shocks, two competitiveness of Australian industry with im- world wars, post war reconstruction and provided ports. the foundations for the strong economy we have today. The fact is that in many industries, lowering the cost of labour will not be meet with an increase in I think age is a testament to its strength, not a employment, as the effect of those reductions in visage of its weakness. labour costs would be felt in an economy wide But what is weak are the limp excuses the Gov- loss of demand, but also because of the nature of ernment has proffered to sate its ideological fet- production it is unlikely that the marginal return ish. on further employment would be sufficient to It says we need to lock in higher productivity, yet justify more staff. the changes it has introduced since 1996 have This is especially the case in industries such as been responsible for a 0.9 per cent decrease in the transport industry, where profit margins are average annual productivity. That’s a loss of al- generally already at their most advantageous most three complete years of productivity point for the employer. In the event that the cost growth—we are three years behind. of labour is lowered—as this bill attempts—it If anything its outdated, it is the Government’s would encourage a race to the bottom between world view. It idolises a labour market without various competitors for the pool of semi-skilled guarantees, with the balance all in the employers’ labour. favour, and a race to the bottom with India and Some time ago the Beyond the midnight oil report China. noted the relationship between low wages and It was these very circumstances—and the associ- low levels of safety in that industry. Strong col- ated discrediting of that world view—which led lective wage determination and bargaining proc- to the foundation of the first Commonwealth Ar- esses create a level playing field across the indus- bitration and Conciliation Courts. try, so as to not allow one firm to under-cut their Having lost the battle of ideas, John Howard now competitors via attacking the decency of their seeks to change the facts and wants take Australia employees’ wages. back to the idolised adolescent dreaming of his It is these most vulnerable workers who need the early political youth. protection of collective agreements. Their fami- Someone should remind that man of the massive lies cannot afford a race to the bottom, as in many difference between his early earnings as a solici- cases they are already there, already struggling to tor and those earnings of the average men and make ends meet. women, who provided for a family and gave peo- Conclusion: ple like myself the best start in life they could. I indicated earlier that this bill is the end of the I have no doubt that posterity will vindicate my chapter for the great social reforms of the Hawke- party’s position in this debate. Keating Governments. In my time here, I have I have every confidence in Manning Clark’s great witnessed the slow ebbing away of the great description of Australian politics as a struggle foundations of the Australian social democratic between the ‘straighteners’ and ‘enlargeners’ of compact. life will haunt this Government. Many of my colleagues have used the term “ex- I know we must and will win this fight. It is a treme” to describe this bill. I do not think extreme fight for the decency for ordinary folk, people

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 133 whose sole ambition is to give their children a ployees in this country. There will be a strip- better start than they had. ping back of awards to just four provisions— And finally I know only my Party will give them annual leave, parental leave, personal leave the industrial rights and time with the family that and maximum number of ordinary hours, they need to realise that hope. plus whatever the new minimum wage is to I wish to conclude my remarks on this bill by be. There is the removal of unfair dismissal thanking the Senate and my colleagues for the provisions for employees working for a indulgence shown to me this last few weeks as I business of up to 100 staff, and, finally, a so- recover from major surgery. called review of the number of awards with I would particularly like to record my apprecia- the stated intention of slashing the current tion to the medical and general staff at Nepean approximately 4,000 back to a handful. Pre- Private Hospital, Banksia Ward and Critical Care sumably, in that slash and burn effort, no- Unit/HDU for the wonderfully dedicated and one’s wages and conditions—or minima— professional manner they cared for me before, during and after surgery. are going to be increased, but rather will be decreased back to whatever remains in the Finally I would like to express my sincerest grati- tude to Associate Professor John Cartmill; his award minima to be determined. We are ef- professionalism and humanity lead me through fectively presented with the deregulation of the labyrinth. most of the wages and conditions applying to Senator SHERRY (Tasmania) (6.07 Australian workers in this country. This de- pm)—The Senate is currently considering regulation principle that the Liberal-National the so-called Workplace Relations Amend- Party has adopted, effectively treats Austra- ment (Work Choices) Bill 2005. I will firstly lian workers, human beings, as just another make some general comments about this market commodity to be traded and sold like Liberal-National government’s approach to any other good or service. That is the fundamental approach of this government. the legislation and then go into some detail about the alleged economic benefits claimed The consequence of this bill will be pro- to flow from this particular bill. The bill goes found in its economic and social impact on to a radical shake-up of our current industrial Australian families, because it will remove relations system. The current system regu- what is a strong, fair safety net that currently lates and protects wages and conditions for protects Australian workers and their fami- all Australian workers. In its essential ele- lies. Deeply embedded in Australian eco- ments, the bill goes to a new so-called Fair nomic and social culture is the notion of the Pay Commission to set the minimum wage, fair go principle. That is what distinguishes with no explanation about what is inadequate Australia from most, if not all, other similar about the current setting of the minimum types of advanced economy countries around wage. the world. Take, for example, the United Secondly is the removal of the no disad- States. The concept of the fair go principle in vantage test that prevents an employer from the United States, compared to Australia, is packaging wages and conditions—such as very weak indeed. Over time, it is not going public holidays, penalty rates, shift payments to happen the day after the bill passes, we and others—below their equivalent award will see the gradual erosion and a withering value or level. The removal of that no disad- away of wages and conditions for millions of Australians. vantage test has significant implications for the overall total level of remuneration of em- This bill most starkly represents the Americanisation of Australian society. This

CHAMBER 134 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Liberal government has taken up with great The Business Council of Australia, ACCI gusto elements of economic and social pol- and other principal business interests, were icy from the United States. We have seen it immediately saying to the government, ‘You in other areas, such as education and health, should not miss this opportunity; get in there, but its most significant and serious impact is reduce wages and conditions of Australian represented by the bill that we are consider- workers in the name of flexibility.’ Of ing. It will lead to growing numbers of work- course, it did not take long for the Liberal- ing poor in Australia. National Party to buckle. Within a couple of What is interesting to note about this par- weeks they were announcing a radical, dra- ticular legislation is that not one word of it conian shake-up—effectively, deregulation was mentioned prior to the last election. of our industrial relations system. It did not Senator McGauran looks slightly as- need much pressure, of course, because ideo- tounded—I will get to the astounded and logically the Liberal-National Party have squashed National Party a little later in my always wanted to deregulate the labour mar- comments. If you look at Liberal-National ket. That is what drives this particular piece Party policy, there was not one word men- of legislation. So they could not resist the tioned of this particular legislation prior to temptation of a Senate majority and they the last election. It was only mentioned after could not resist the pressure because, as I the election when the Liberal-National Party said, ideologically that has always been their discovered that it had a majority in the Sen- view and, certainly, the long stated view of ate. I remember the words of the Prime Min- the Prime Minister. He has just never had the ister at that stage when he publicly stated opportunity. I think that this bill, more than that there would be no extreme legislation anything, and the approach of this govern- presented and that the government would not ment, reflects arrogance. They are out of take advantage of the majority it had in the touch with the community. It is about reduc- Senate. Do you remember that commitment ing the security of Australian workers and by the Prime Minister, Mr Howard? Like a their families. That is what it is all about. lot of other commitments that we can re- I have to say that I have been pleased at member—like the ‘never, ever’ comments the awareness in the broader community of about the GST—it did not last very long. the implications of this legislation. In my 15 Also, it is interesting that, at the last elec- years in the Senate, I have only ever encoun- tion, the Liberal-National party signed up to tered a similar volume of comment from the family impact statements on legislation. ordinary person in the street where I live on Where is the family impact statement on this one other issue, and that was the GST. There particular piece of legislation? This is yet is certainly very significant concern about another convenient promise made by the this legislation in the community—as there Prime Minister, Mr Howard, and forgotten as should be. soon as the government had the opportunity The Liberal Party, in particular, is fond of with the majority in the Senate given to them using the word ‘choice’. It is used as a con- in last election. There was not one word of venient title, as a badge, for anything nasty this so-called reform mentioned prior to the that it wants to do. So, if you want to do last election. something nasty, don’t call it deregulation— What we saw after the election, of course, goodness gracious, if you called it deregula- was the top end of town at it straightaway. tion, the reaction would be even worse; what you do is attach to the title the word ‘choice’.

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 135

The claim is that it is all about choice, flexi- legitimate education campaign to inform the bility and productivity. The claim by the community about the implications and de- government is that individuals and the coun- tails of a new law, why do we have a $55 try’s economic prosperity will improve. I million campaign before the bill passes the want to pose a fundamental question: if, as parliament? We have never seen such an ex- the Liberal-National Party claim, we have traordinarily extravagant, costly campaign in enjoyed 14 years of economic growth, why Australian history. Thank goodness for the change the current system? Why change the ACTU: they have alerted the Australian current industrial relations system if the community to this appalling legislation. They economy is doing so well? should be congratulated on their community Senator McGauran—For the future age- campaign. ing population. I live on the north-west coast of Tasmania. Senator SHERRY—The ageing popula- In my home state of Tasmania, UnionsTas, tion? I might get to that later, if that is the with hundreds of grassroot activists—and limit of your contribution, Senator McGau- this is what should worry the Liberal- ran— National Party—on the north-west coast of Tasmania have been running a very strong Senator McGauran—That is one part of campaign informing people in the commu- it. You wanted an answer. nity about the impact this legislation is going Senator SHERRY—The Labor Party in to have. Last weekend I was at the Devon- government did more in relation to the age- port show, where UnionsTas had a stall. I ing population issue by introducing compul- have to say that it was more popular than the sory superannuation, Senator McGauran— Labor Party stall, the Liberal Party stall and which you opposed. You opposed funding every other stall in that particular shed at the the ageing population and funding retirement show. There was enormous community con- incomes. cern expressed as people lined up to sign the The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT petitions and to gather information about (Senator Ferguson)—Senator Sherry, I what was going on. I congratulate the union think you should address your remarks activists for the work they have done. This through the chair. grassroots campaign will continue on to the Senator SHERRY—Thank you, I will. next election—have no doubt about that. The Senator McGauran is interjecting. He can Labor Party’s campaign and the grassroots make his own speech. The weight of evi- campaign through the union movement will dence does not justify the claim that this continue. Even a $55 million taxpayer government has made about the so-called funded propaganda campaign will not be economic benefits. In fact, the central case able to overcome the effective communica- the government puts forward is false. It is a tion of that grassroots campaign that we are false argument—albeit, it is the only argu- seeing. ment the government can latch on to to cover My philosophical approach is that central what it effectively intends to do. It is a delib- to any civilised society and central to the erate pitch at, I might say, taxpayer expense. Australian ethos is the notion of a fair go. I We have this appallingly extravagant and am proud to say that the notion of a fair go costly propaganda campaign that will reach a was a founding principle of the Labor Party total of some $55 million before the legisla- and the need for government to intervene to tion even passes. If you are going to have a redress the balance between the employer

CHAMBER 136 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 and the employee. It is the owners of capital bill through the Senate and saying, ‘We’ve who have the greatest bargaining power. This got the numbers.’ That is the attitude that we notion of choice is a misnomer. It is not a are being confronted with here time and time level playing field. An individual is ex- again. pected, as a consequence of this legislation, Senator McGauran is in the chamber. I can to individually bargain with an employer. never resist the temptation to remind him The employer has the absolute right to hire about the position of the National Party. and fire. They are the ones who employ and Senator Joyce is here as well. We heard a lot also fire. But the employer also has signifi- of noise from Senator Joyce on behalf of the cant resources that an employee or potential Queensland National Party last week. They employee does not have. An employer has were going to fight to ensure that significant accountants, lawyers and, in many cases, public holidays could not be taken off em- specialist industrial relations officers to assist ployees. They were going to fight for them. Christmas Day, Anzac Day and Good Friday. What I find interesting about AWAs is that They were also going to fight to stop compa- an employee can present an AWA but I have nies restructuring to take advantage of the never heard of them doing it. I have never 100 employee cut-off point below which heard of an individual fronting up with their unfair dismissal provisions do not apply. own AWA and saying to the employer, ‘What What have we got? Senator Joyce cannot about my AWA?’ This is the choice we have even save Christmas Day. There was a lot of got. It is always the employer putting the noise from Senator Joyce, but the only way AWA in front of the employee. The reality to effectively ensure that all public holidays is—and this is where it is not a level playing are adequately protected is to have a penalty field—that, if you do not sign the AWA, you which applies to all public holidays and do not get the job. If you do not accept what which cannot be taken off employees. Sena- is in the AWA, you do not get the job. That is tor Joyce laughs and smiles but what we had not a level playing field as far as negotiations last week was the usual Joyce histrionics and go. Our current industrial relations system National Party positioning. What has he de- does intervene in the market in the name of livered? He cannot even save Christmas Day. social justice and fairness and it does inter- I referred earlier to Devonport Show Day. vene to redress the bargaining balance be- On the north-west coast of Tasmania, we tween an employee and an employer. That is have— a very important part of the Australian social Senator McGauran—We did not save ethos. that! We also saw the arrogance of this gov- Senator SHERRY—I will take that inter- ernment on display with respect to the com- jection, Senator McGauran. Devonport Show mittee inquiry. We had a quickie five-day Day is a very important—and they laugh— Senate inquiry. Mr Howard, the Prime Min- local public holiday. You go round to the ister, claims: ‘There was no need for an in- local show days in Victoria and Queensland quiry; we’ve had inquiries into industrial and suggest that they should be wiped out relations in the past.’ That is true, but we and you will get a pretty— have never had a fair dinkum inquiry into the massive new deregulatory and radical provi- Senator McGauran—They are not a pub- sions that are in this bill. So what do we get? lic holiday. We get an arrogant government shoving the

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 137

Senator SHERRY—They are a public social policies. They will not, as this gov- holiday in Tasmania, Senator McGauran. In ernment in its propaganda campaign is Tasmania, we have locally declared and ga- claiming, flow as consequences of this par- zetted public holidays for our shows right ticular radical deregulation of the Australian around the state of Tasmania. They are very labour market. They will not happen as con- important. Those local public holidays, such sequences of this bill. as Devonport Show Day, King Island Show The Liberal-National Party claim this be- Day, Burnie Show Day and Hobart Regatta cause it is the only line they have to try to Day, are very important to a local commu- justify this legislation, but there is no clear nity. It is not just the so-called iconic public evidence that that will occur. I urge inter- holidays, such as Good Friday and Christmas ested people to look at the economic evi- Day, that are important. Local public holi- dence, because it does not exist. It is an as- days are very important to the fabric of our sertion; it is a claim. It is a propaganda line local communities, and they will slowly of this government that is being projected on whither as a consequence of this legislation. the airwaves and in newspapers to the tune I recommend to the Senate and to those of $55 million. (Time expired) listening that they read the Senate report on Senator JOYCE (Queensland) (6.27 this particular bill. Although it had to be pm)—The unrepresentative and bullying rushed because of the arrogance of this gov- days of the unions are over, and it is the end ernment in wanting to push this legislation of the funding mechanism of the Australian through the Senate by Christmas, it does go Labor Party. The Labor Party has to move to into some considerable detail—particularly a new horizon and stop believing that repre- in the Labor Party section of that report and senting 17 per cent—and falling—of the in the report by the other cross-bench par- Australian private sector work force is a rea- ties—about the so-called evidence being ad- son to believe that it has the right to govern vanced about this legislation ensuring a Australia for all. The Labor Party has to take stronger economy and stronger employment a leaf from Tony Blair’s book and move on. growth. Where is the empirical evidence that Maybe that is an ominous sign for the cur- the deregulation of the labour market that rent leadership in the Australian Labor Party. will occur as a result of this bill will result in The whole farce of open ballots, antagonism a stronger economy and lower unemploy- and standover tactics in the workplace is a ment? Where is the evidence? dead or dying art form, and it is great to pre- If you look at the OECD countries—the side over the end of those bitter days—so advanced economies—and compare Austra- prevalent in the past—when all on a work lia to them, there are some countries with site had to participate in unions out of threat more tightly regulated labour markets that rather than conviction. have lower unemployment rates and there The new Australia is the vision of small are some that have more tightly regulated business, with the entrepreneurial spirit be- labour markets with higher unemployment ing the powerhouse driving us forward. To- rates. There is no clear empirical evidence day is the era of the efficient enterprise that deregulating the labour market will of working for a profit that is only limited by itself ensure a stronger economy or lower effort and managerial skill. The greatest fear unemployment. The reality is that a strong the local electrician has is that his work force economy and lower unemployment are con- will one day become his competition. Guess sequences of a whole range of economic and

CHAMBER 138 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 what? They will. This promotes the idea that you get paid for staying at home, and you if you think for yourself early you will work still have the right that they cannot sack you. for yourself later. The automatism of being It is better than penalty rates. shackled to awards has to be taken over by The closure of loopholes is another Na- self-determination of one’s own future. tional Party success story. We will be closing However, the government must protect the the loopholes for organisations so that a vulnerable and keep the basic social infra- middle manager in a large organisation does structure in place for a harmonious and con- not have the unencumbered right of dis- tinuous Australian culture. We have spent a missal over you. We do that because we great deal of time making sure that we think it is fair and just. It is another amend- amend this legislation to protect the intent of ment that the National Party have secured in the lower house while maintaining the pro- working with this legislation. The legislation tections for those who are the most vulner- is being taken to the High Court to confirm able. To this purpose, and with my Senate or otherwise its constitutional validity and colleagues in this house, we have secured the protection of states’ rights. I am sure the amendments. These are noted in the commit- full bench of the High Court has a better idea tee report and additional items. of states’ rights than I. State awards will still The process of the Senate and its commit- exist, and there will still be a vast number of tees has called for, and shall secure, amend- employees in the state public service, for ments on such items as outworker provi- instance, who will not be affected by this. sions, prohibited content, AWA terminations, The new system has a range of safeguards. apprenticeship provisions, averaging of The Fair Pay Commission will be opera- hours and annual leave. It was the work of tional and representative of all. While ensur- the National Party in this chamber that has ing fair outcomes and balancing competing also secured amendments on pay periods— demands, it will protect those who are most the whole debunking of the myth that you vulnerable. The Australian Industrial Rela- can only get paid yearly. Obviously, that will tions Commission is conducting the 2005 default to fortnightly, so we have come in on safety net review, and the new minimum that. wage that comes out of this process will be The National Party has come in and pro- locked in following this review and will con- tected the iconic public holidays—in fact, all tinue to increase through future decisions public holidays. So there will be a Good Fri- made by the Fair Pay Commission. As is the day, Christmas Day, Boxing Day, Anzac Day case now, where very few get paid at the and Australia Day. When you have Christ- award and the vast majority get paid above mas this year, you can thank the National it, this will continue under the Fair Pay Com- Party for protecting that day. It is better than mission by reason of the demand for labour penalty rates because it protects your right, if being greater than the supply due to the Na- you so choose, not to go to work. You cannot tional-Liberal management of the economy. be sacked, and they cannot change your con- Dignity and respect will remain the ves- ditions because you have not gone to work. tige of the Australian character and laws. The You must get paid ordinary hours if you are final protection mechanism will remain in at home with your children. So the only al- place to give all employees a safety net, just ternative for the employer is to offer you in case any employer forgets and decides that something far more substantial than what they will chance their arm with exploitation.

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 139

The Nationals have sought assurances that promote the argument that the world will the Office of the Employment Advocate and change as of next week, but it will not, and the Office of Workplace Services will be those who have said that it will are going to spread over the nation, and officers will be in look a little foolish when it does not come to places such as Emerald, Toowoomba, Char- pass. leville and Townsville. The Employment So the Senate has been assured of these Advocate will afford everyone—everyone— amendments. Much to the surprise of my protection without the indignity of being good colleagues on the other side who now forced to pay union membership fees, a pro- have egg on their faces, what they said we portion of which are siphoned off to support would not get we are securing right at this political parties and political campaigns, re- moment—there is a joint party meeting as I gardless of the convictions of the members. speak—and that is those amendments. It is Very few employers will have any hope of convenient to promote the argument. So the attaining their labour requirements if all they Senate has been assured of these amend- offer is the safety net and their competitors ments, the majority of which have been are offering more. Remember the primary raised by the Senate committee. This is yet purpose of these changes is simplification of another indication of the operation of the a system that governs employment in Austra- Senate continuing as a separate house and lia. We must simplify a system that allows unaffected in its commitment to its role, re- for the ridiculous situation of having one gardless of its political make-up. workplace being governed by rules and regu- The dignity and purpose of this house lations from differing jurisdictions—a situa- shall continue on. The apocryphal bards have tion that has led to small organisations ex- predicted the demise of the government so pending resources on administering paper often that the masses are starting to doubt rather than engaging in productive activities. these palace shamans as they continue falling By modernising and simplifying the indus- over, frothing at the mouth and predicting the trial relations system, we will give the many end of the world. Yet every year we seem to mums and dads who run many of our small get wealthier in real terms and, as a nation, businesses the confidence that they can em- stronger. In this instance, my good col- ploy people, allowing them to expand their leagues on the other side have put all their businesses, seek out new opportunities or eggs in the one basket that this IR chariot is simply have some time off for themselves. pulled by every horse of the apocalypse and, Finally, the legislation will be the judg- if Australians find that their world does not ment of the Australian people, who at the end, they may just start to believe that, in- next election will have the opportunity, if stead of a reasoned opposition who sug- they so wish, to give the strongest message gested constructive changes, you are morph- possible on how they feel about the governing into the little boy who cried wolf just one ment’s direction. No legislation of any type too many times. The unfortunate thing about is locked in for perpetuity, and the purpose of crying wolf for the opposite side is that you the government is to match the legislation to actually have to deliver the wolf, and when the requirements of the times. If in times to you continue to fail to produce the specimen come changes are required, changes will be you all end up looking unreliable. made. This is Capital Hill, not Mount Sinai, The interesting thing for the future will be and legislation is drafted on paper and not what path federally the Labor Party take, as handed down in stone. It is convenient to

CHAMBER 140 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 they realise the well of trade unionism has silence. I expect him to be listened to in si- run dry and now they must be brave enough lence as well. There will be no interjecting. to build a party that inspires a new constitu- Senator JOYCE—Those opposite should ency. It is essential for Australian democracy take note of the fact that there are now over that they do, and although I belong to the 5.1 million active ABNs in Australia. That is government I wish them all the best and will more than in union membership, by the way. watch with interest. If they fail, the Greens, We have been so successful in putting people who are continuing to eat into their constitu- into business that it is very hard to find spare ency, will eat further into the left-hand side labour. If you have your labour to sell, you of the Labor Party, and the National Party can ask for a premium price. What we have and others on this side will reach further into seen over the past few years with the intro- the right-hand side. The Australian Labor duction of AWAs are flexible arrangements Party have to stop holding out the forlorn within workplaces which better match em- hope that there will be a depression and that ployee and employer needs to the benefit of the associated misery will inspire new mem- both groups. bership for them. We have seen examples such as Diana You have to get smarter and move forward Williams, an Australian Business Woman of in the paradigm of the new social economic the Year, who has an almost 3,000-strong conditions. The 1930s ‘Comrade, how are work force on AWAs. These agreements al- you?’ lingua franca is anachronistic, ridicu- lowed flexibility which enabled very gener- lous and insincere. For the punters on the ous maternity leave arrangements as part of street, it makes their flesh creep. They won- the working agreement. It is this flexibility der where you have been for the last 70 that both employees and employers are de- years. If they grew up in Latham’s happy manding. There are vast numbers of plant Green Valley, they certainly do not want to operators and workers on mine sites in my go back there. state—and I imagine in yours, Senator The basis of a viable social structure is Sterle—that get paid far more than us here in high employment and structured endeavour this house. One hundred and sixty thousand that leads to a robust, broad based economy. dollars a year is not unusual. There are a lot The major job that accountants now do in of people here who are not seeing that regional towns and metropolitan cities is set money. If a wage is determined by supply up new businesses with new ABNs. All of and demand, there is a greater demand for these new National Party and Liberal Party plant operators on mine sites than there is for voters are making the move to self- federal senators. That is where our economy determination. It is a wonderful feeling and a is and we have to accept an industrial rela- wonderful thing to see. We make sure we tions policy that deals with that environment. monitor the process closely so they are not I am sure that the mine workers of Mount Isa getting exploited, but generally they are just are happy with their pay, but the mine site getting wealthier, with a higher sense of self- needs more workers. There may be a few esteem and a clearer destiny. here who, after the next election, will have a Senator Sterle interjecting— better paying future in that new line of work. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT This legislation is designed for Australia’s (Senator Ferguson)—Senator Sterle, Sena- needs. We must match the rules and regulator Joyce listened to a provocative speech in tions that govern these aspirations to these

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 141 times. Australia wants and votes for—listen Senator McGauran—That was against to this—a government that is brave enough the comrades! to lead. To lead means to look forward and Senator George Campbell—That was head in that direction, dealing with the issues exactly the point, Senator McGauran, you as they arise. To date, as with so many nong! things, those opposite have failed to under- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— stand that the worker of 2005 is vastly differ- Order! Senator George Campbell, you will ent to the one their grandfather grew up with withdraw that. in 1932, comrades. Senator George Campbell—I withdraw Senator O’BRIEN (Tasmania) (6.41 it. pm)—We just heard from a man who, before coming into this place, said to the people of Senator O’BRIEN—As I said, this ex- Queensland that he would oppose and not treme and divisive industrial relations legis- vote for legislation to sell Telstra, and he did. lation is given expression in the Workplace Now he has invented a reason to prevent him Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Bill from voting against this legislation—that is, 2005 and I reject it. I do so as a member of a he should simply amend legislation from the political party that has opposed, since its in- House of Representatives and not vote it ception over 100 years ago, conservative down. What a movement in logic it has been attacks on wages and conditions of working for Senator Joyce since he was elected— Australians. I do so as a senator for Tasmania from the point where he was prepared to and who recognises the negative impact that this promised to vote against a piece of legisla- bill will have on job security and the stan- tion to the point where now he says that he dard of living of the people I represent. I do has not the right to do anything other than so as the shadow minister for transport con- seek to make legislation better. cerned about transport workers and small transport businesses forced to give up condi- It is easy to present an argument when you tions and cut costs under the proposed re- invent the argument of those you want to gime. I also do so as a former official of the argue against. We just heard a prime example Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous of that from Senator Joyce, who concocted Workers Union, a job where I proudly repre- the structure of the opposition’s arguments. sented many of the lowest-paid workers in Not once have I heard any of those proposi- this country. tions put on this side of the chamber. But the Hansard will reveal how inaccurate the ob- Any objective observer knows that there is servations of the senator were. The fact of very little equality in most Australian work- the matter is that he opened by talking about places. The notion of employee bargaining how this legislation would do what he hoped power is a misnomer in most circumstances. it would—that is, destroy the trade union It is a complete nonsense in workplaces movement. I do recall that there were a great made up of young, poorly educated, part- many people on the other side of the cham- time or casual employees. The current edi- ber who marched in support of Solidarity, the tion of the National Indigenous Times high- Polish union, and talked about the rights of lights another group of workers who do not workers in Poland. But they are not prepared enjoy equal power in the workplace: Indige- to do it here. nous Australians. Professor Larissa Behrendt writes:

CHAMBER 142 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

... much of our mob ... are less educated than the relations agenda had shifted when the Prime rest of the country, are already more likely to be Minister refused to reaffirm his guarantee unemployed, may have English as a second lan- that legislative changes would not leave Aus- guage and will live in remote and rural areas tralian workers worse off. The shadow min- where there are less jobs. ister for industrial relations, Stephen Smith, She continues: is right when he says that the reason the Even the many of us who live in the city know Prime Minister will not offer a guarantee is that the job market can still favour a non- that making workers worse off is a public Aboriginal employee and that good jobs can still policy objective of this government. be hard to come by if you do not have a high level of education. There are many obnoxious features of the Work Choices bill. I want to focus on three: Australia, frankly, has a shameful history the attack on the minimum wage, the spon- with respect to the employment rights of In- sored coercion of workers to sign Australian digenous Australians. Anyone with knowl- workplace agreements and the shredding of edge of the Northern Territory cattle industry unfair dismissal protection. No aspect of this knows well the past exploitation to which bill is more loathsome than the attack on the Indigenous Australians were subject on the minimum wage. The Howard government ground of race. But that is not the only place record speaks for itself. The plain fact is that or the only industry where Indigenous Aus- if this government’s national wage case tralians have been ill-served by the industrial submissions had been adopted today’s mini- laws of this country. These new laws will mum wage would be lower to the tune of $50 inaugurate another shameful chapter. The a week, or $2,600 a year. In real terms, the Howard government talks a lot about the minimum wage would have fallen by 1.55 economic empowerment of Indigenous Aus- per cent since 1996. tralians, so it is beyond comprehension that it is moving to destroy the protections afforded The government could not win an argu- to vulnerable workers, including Indigenous ment before the Industrial Relations Com- Australians, in the workplace. mission, so it has acted to take away its wage fixing powers. This bill grants those powers An enduring characteristic of the Austra- to the so-called Fair Pay Commission. This lian industrial relations system—fairness— new commission lacks the independence will be discarded because the Howard gov- from government enjoyed by the Industrial ernment has won control of the Senate and Relations Commission. To make doubly sure cannot restrain itself. The government did that the Fair Pay Commission delivers the not present a radical industrial manifesto to result demanded by the government—that is, the Australian people at last year’s election. a falling minimum wage in real terms— It did not do so because it knew that the Aus- fairness cannot inform its deliberations. The tralian people would reject its agenda. Hon- proposed section 7J establishes the Fair Pay esty has not been the hallmark of the Howard Commission’s wage fixing parameters, and government years, so it is little surprise that fairness is not one of them. the government kept its radical agenda secret. It is bad enough to undermine the wages Currently, section 88B(2) of the Work- and conditions of working Australians, but to place Relations Act 1996 provides that the do so without seeking the endorsement of the Industrial Relations Commission must en- people is beyond the pale. After the election sure ‘a safety net of fair minimum wages and it was clear that the government’s industrial conditions of employment is established and

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 143 maintained’. In exercising its wage fixing mission, which was tabled in the Senate to- function, the first matter the Industrial Rela- day. I think it is important to briefly note this tions Commission must have regard to is the report, because the work that the Human need to provide fair minimum standards for Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission employees in the context of living standards does is vitally important. I have only five generally prevailing in the Australian com- minutes to address it at the moment, so I will munity. With the passage of the Work rush through some of the significant Choices bill the requirement for fairness will achievements that are listed in the report. be no more. It is a sick joke that the govern- The report draws attention to the fact that in ment pulped tens of thousands of propaganda August of this year the federal government booklets because they did not contain the released all children from immigration deten- word ‘fair’. Yet the legislation ensures that tion. It rightly notes that the report by the the Fair Pay Commission cannot take fair- Human Rights Commissioner into children ness into account when exercising its wage in immigration detention, called A last re- fixing responsibilities. sort?, played a significant role, along with The second aspect of the bill that I want to the work of many other individuals and address is the plan to allow employers to community groups of course, in achieving force workers into Australian workplace this very positive outcome. agreements. The bill facilitates—indeed If that were all that the Commission had promotes—the exercise of industrial thug- achieved in the space of 12 months that gery by employers. It is clear that the How- alone would be well and truly worth the cost. ard government has been embarrassed by the But it does much more than that, of course. It minimal take-up of AWAs by the Australian released a paper about the importance for work force. The fact is that Australian work- men and women of striking a balance beers, contrary to what has been said, do not tween work and family, released by the Sex want them. So what is the government’s re- Discrimination Commissioner in June this sponse? A green flag for employers to coerce year. That has been a key part of a wide- workers to give up hard-won conditions of ranging debate, including on the legislation employment in exchange for an AWA or, if which Senator O’Brien and many others they will not sign the contract, a boot out the have been debating over the last few days. front door. On the face of it, the bill contains I would also draw attention to the com- a similar prohibition on coercion to that mission’s report from 2004 on the national which is contained in the existing bill. The consultations on eliminating prejudice new proposed section— against Muslim and Arab Australians. It is an Debate interrupted. absolutely vital report. I would urge and DOCUMENTS hope that all senators and many others revisit it as part of the debate on national security Human Rights and Equal Opportunity matters. The preliminary evaluations of that Commission report showed significant education and Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (6.50 awareness programs run by Arab and Mus- pm)—I move: lim communities, as well as by government, That the Senate take note of the document. police and others, as a direct and indirect This document is the annual report of the result of that report’s recommendations. That Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Com- is a very important and positive result from that aspect of the commission’s work.

CHAMBER 144 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

There were also consultations held with range of rights related issues. The report is regard to mental health services in Australia, called Rights of passage. It is the final report with a report due soon. An eight-page com- issued by the Human Rights Commissioner, munity guide summarising both the social Dr Sev Ozdowski, before he finishes his justice report and the native title report was five-year tenure next week. I would like to distributed in national Indigenous newspa- take the opportunity to pay tribute to Dr Oz- pers to make those reports more accessible to dowski’s work in a range of areas and par- those communities. There was the publica- ticularly, from my experience, in the area of tion of a report on federal discrimination law. immigration law and detention. The report This annual report also details the complaints shows that young people are not without handling, which finalised 91 per cent of their views and concerns, particularly on complaints within 12 months, exceeding the issues such as social isolation, mental health key performance indicators. The commission problems, bullying, racism and homophobia. also finalised its work in two significant in- The report also highlights the importance of tervention matters regarding the detention of human rights education programs and re- asylum seekers under Australia’s migration sources to teachers and students. It shows the laws. And it continues to play a part in the direct link between knowledge, attitudes and legislative process by making submissions to end behaviour. For all the talk we have at the inquiries held by Senate and other parlia- moment about the behaviour of people, we mentary committees, not least with regard to need to look back to the start. I seek leave to the recent inquiry into the antiterrorism leg- continue my remarks later. islation. There were over 15,000 subscribers Leave granted; debate adjourned. added to the 10 electronic mailing lists of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal commission, bringing the total number of subscribers to 36,000. The number of web Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (6.57 page views in the last relevant financial year pm)—I move: was a total of over 5½ million. That the Senate take note of the document. That is just a snapshot, and not a complete This document is the annual report for the oversight of the work of the commission in Administrative Appeals Tribunal, which was the relevant time frame. It is very much tabled in the Senate yesterday. Again, there is worth drawing attention to and praising. only five minutes to go over this issue, so I There is often a lot of ill-informed commen- cannot do it full justice. I would like to high- tary in some parts of the community suggest- light this report as part of drawing attention ing bodies such as the Human Rights Com- to the practical realities underlying some of mission serve no useful purpose and are the theoretical and rhetorical debates that we some sort of nanny-state apparatus that tells have been having about basic legal rights. people what to do. Nothing could be further One example is a case that was ruled on from the truth. This report provides the sub- by the deputy president of the Administrative stance to show how facile those arguments Appeals Tribunal back in October—the case are. of SRHHH appealing against the minister for I would also like to take the opportunity in immigration. The person was an Afghan. It the brief time available to me to note the re- was found by the tribunal that were no seri- port launched by the commission just yester- ous reasons for considering that the applicant day into young people’s knowledge about had engaged in conduct within the relevant human rights and their views on a wide part of the refugee convention which had

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 145 previously been used to disqualify that per- very telling because it is the sort of thing that son from receiving a protection visa—a can happen to any one of us—he was not refugee visa. That finding came more than given the opportunity before that tribunal to six years after the person initially arrived in see the details of the allegations made Australia with his wife and children. His against him. He could not respond to them wife and children are now out in the com- despite an original order by the tribunal munity. They have been out in the commu- member that he be provided with details by nity from a very early period—back in 1999. the immigration department of the allega- They are now Australian citizens. His chil- tions made against him—what the specifics dren have grown up without him throughout were, when they were supposed to have oc- the six-year period that he has remained in curred and what the nature of them was. That Villawood detention centre. More than six information was not provided to him and, weeks after the Administrative Appeals Tri- because he could not respond to those allega- bunal finding, which remitted the matter tions, not surprisingly he did not do a very back to the immigration minister for consid- good job of defending himself against them eration, that man, unless the situation has because he did not know what they were. changed in the last day and I have not heard He was then refused a visa on those about it, is still in detention. He is impris- grounds. It was not until 2004 that a full oned, separated from his Australian-citizen Federal Court judgment, Applicant S214 ver- wife and children, as he has been now for sus the Minister, of 2002, brought down on well over six years. 26 March 2004, found that he had been de- The extraordinary reason he is still there is nied procedural fairness. It was a decision that, having gone through all the trauma over that was originally upheld by the first Fed- more than six years to finally have the as- eral Court judge. Because a person was not sessment made that there were no character able to respond to anonymous allegations or other improper action grounds for refusing made against him and because he was not him a visa, it is only at that stage that the given the detail of those allegations so he ASIO assessment kicked in. We have had could defend himself, he has spent six years him sitting in jail for over six years. We in detention, I would argue wrongfully, waited till he was finally found not to be dis- whilst his wife and child have lived without qualified under the relevant part of the refu- him. They are Australian citizens and the gee convention and then we decided to get husband has continued to be locked up for ASIO to have a look at doing the relevant over six years purely because anonymous checks that they are required to do under the allegations were made and he was not able to Migration Act. And during all that period he defend himself on so-called security stays locked up. grounds. That is a perfect example of the sort This person’s case was originally put be- of thing that can happen to any one of us fore the Administrative Appeals Tribunal when security grounds are used to allow a back in 2001, I think. At that time he was complete denial of procedural fairness. (Time accused of a range of activities constituting expired) crimes against humanity under the refugee Question agreed to. convention which would disqualify him from getting a protection visa. Obviously it is appropriate for those allegations to be considered, but extraordinarily—and I think this is

CHAMBER 146 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Equal Opportunity for Women in the I hope you know that what you are saying is Workplace Agency wrong, and that you have recourse to the Austra- lian Industrial Relations Commission. Senator MARSHALL (Victoria) (7.02 pm)—I move: In the Senate committee on the last day of the hearing we had the opportunity to ques- That the Senate take note of the document. tion the Department of Employment and In moving to take note of the Equal Oppor- Workplace Relations. I wanted to get to the tunity for Women in the Workplace Agency’s bottom of this, because 151 academics sup- report for 2004-05, I note that women are ported the submission by Professor Peetz and going to be especially disadvantaged by the Senator Barnett said that Professor Peetz was application of the Work Choices legislation, wrong. So I asked the departmental officials: particularly in the area of unfair dismissals. Senator Barnett asked Professor Peetz this ques- This was something that the Senate inquiry, tion yesterday: due to its terms of reference, was forbidden Do you stand by your statement that a boss can to investigate. However, during that inquiry sack you for chewing gum? Senator Barnett from the government did introduce unfair dismissals into the inquiry Professor Peetz said: and I want to bring to the Senate’s attention Chewing gum is not a discriminatory reason cov- this exchange in the committee Hansard. ered by the unlawful termination provisions. Senator Barnett asked Professor Peetz, who Is that the case? was a witness appearing before the commit- The departmental official concerned, a Ms tee, this question: Centenera, said: Do you stand by your statement that a boss can Yes, assuming another prohibited reason does not sack you for chewing gum? apply. Professor Peetz replied: I said: If you are in a firm with fewer than 100 employ- We are talking about chewing gum only. ees, then you can be sacked for any reason what- Ms Centenera said: soever unless it is an unlawful termination. Unlawful termination relates to discrimination. Yes, that is correct. There are discriminatory reasons. Chewing gum The evidence quite clearly is on the table that is not a discriminatory reason covered by the chewing gum is not a discriminatory reason unlawful termination provisions. Therefore, if you and therefore you clearly can be sacked. No- are in a firm with fewer than 100 employees, you one is saying that someone would sack you could be sacked for chewing gum. I am not say- for chewing gum but we were trying to get to ing that an employer would sack you for chewing gum; I am saying what is possible. In firms with the bottom of what is possible and what is more than 100 employees—where operational not. I made the point, and we made the point reasons apply—if you are precluded from making in the report, that we were quite staggered a claim because of what the bill defines as opera- that a government senator on a committee tional reasons, then it does not matter what other inquiring into this report had really failed to aspects of your dismissal were relevant to your grasp the consequences of the legislation that dismissal. You cannot make a claim. So if the we were inquiring into, and I was very dis- employer is able to create a situation in which appointed about that. you are covered by economic, structural, technical or similar reasons for dismissal as part of the But even after that had been included in reason for dismissal, then you can be dismissed. the report, even though we had questioned Senator Barnett later said: the department about this specifically and

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 147 even though the department had agreed that ernment, because you all mouth the same chewing gum was not a discriminatory rea- things. I can barely separate what you say son and therefore you could be sacked for and what you look like sometimes. You are chewing gum, we heard Senator Barnett just one big monolith for the union move- again yesterday in his speech in the second ment. reading debate trying to argue the case that Senator Sherry—Madam Acting Deputy you cannot be sacked for chewing gum. I President, on a point of order: is what sena- find it staggering that not only could he not tors look like relevant to the debate? The work it out at the time we were investigating point of order is relevance. Senator McGau- the bill before us but that, after all the evi- ran is not speaking to the report. The report dence has been presented, after the Depart- is not on the looks or otherwise of senators in ment of Employment and Workplace Rela- this chamber. tions has agreed that it is not a discrimina- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT tory reason and therefore you can be sacked (Senator Moore)—Senator, I do not accept if the employer decides on the spot that that you have a point of order. chewing gum is a sackable offence, he still cannot work it out. Without any discussion Senator McGAURAN—As is so fre- or any recourse an employer can simply ter- quently the case with Senator what’s-his- minate an employee for chewing gum and name over there. they can terminate you for any other reason The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— that is not a discriminatory reason. Senator, I think you should withdraw that That reinforces the very hollow promise comment. that this government gives, underpinning the Senator McGAURAN—I withdraw it. Of Work Choices legislation, that people are course it is Senator Sherry. Anyone would protected from duress. Where an employer know him by voice, by looks and by the ab- can simply concoct any reason to terminate surd points of order he often takes in this an employee, there is duress in the work- chamber. To be brief on this matter, I feel place. If anyone on the other side of the that Senator Marshall’s comments have to be house suggests that there will be not be du- challenged because they use the classic tactic ress as applied by the impact of this bill on we have been getting from the opposition normal working Australians then they are through this whole industrial relations de- completely deluding themselves, just like bate. It is to build this straw case—as those Senator Barnett, who, when all the evidence listening to the broadcast would have is put in front of him, cannot come to the heard—of saying: ‘Chewing gum will get conclusion that you can be sacked unfairly. I you sacked. Look out, Mr Worker. Look out, seek leave to continue my remarks later. labourers. The big, bad boss will get you if Leave granted. you so much as look sideways or if you so much as chew gum.’ They build this straw Senator McGAURAN (Victoria) (7.08 case and attempt the classic fear tactics. pm)—I rise to speak briefly as I feel that Hasn’t the argument from the other side Senator Ludwig’s comments—I apologise: reached the absolute absurd, if not the des- Senator Marshall’s comments— perate, if this is what they are citing as the Opposition senators interjecting— terror within the detail of this legislation— Senator McGAURAN—You all merge that the big, bad boss will get you for abso- into one over there after a few years in gov- lutely anything now? That utterly lacks an

CHAMBER 148 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 understanding of the reality of the work- Sherry, that, in itself, no-one will be sacked place. How out of touch can you get, particu- for chewing gum. I obviously know the real- larly in today’s workplace? That was not the ity of the workplace better than you. You reality of the workplace 10 years ago, let have such a factory mentality. You are think- alone today’s workplace where labour is in ing: if you are chewing gum while you are short supply. The opposition have completely working in a factory, how could you possibly missed the reality of the workplace. be sacked for that? Of course you could not. I feel like we are at a mad hatter’s tea It is probably encouraged. But, Senator party during this debate in which the abso- Sherry, what if the case is that you are chew- lute absurd is being discussed. You are all ing gum at reception at a five-star hotel? You sitting around the table discussing the abso- might even have a spit in the spittoon. There lute stupidity of whether you will get dis- is an order of conduct. I think there would be missed for chewing gum or not. The truth of some workplaces where chewing gum is out the matter is that, in itself, of course you will of place, where you could be rightfully not get sacked for chewing gum. If you are warned. Whether you are sacked or not is inside a factory, it could be— another thing, but you could be rightfully warned to take the gum out of your mouth. I Senator Sherry—Do you guarantee it? dare say if you came into this chamber and Senator McGAURAN—I will guarantee started chewing gum you would be brought it. Come into this chamber one day, once this to order by this most efficient and respect- legislation is passed, and tell me of the per- able chair. And so you ought to be. You are son who has been rightfully sacked for chew- not allowed to eat in this chamber. Do you ing gum. This is not the mad hatter’s tea reckon you would be sacked or kicked out if party, Senator Sherry. People will not get you came into this chamber and ate? Come sacked for chewing gum, in itself. I qualify on! Stop dragging us into your mad hatter’s that by saying ‘in itself’. tea party. Senator Sherry—Madam Acting Deputy Senator HOGG (Queensland) (7.12 President, I rise on two points of order. pm)—I rise on the same matter, to take note Firstly, Senator McGauran should not be of the report of the Equal Opportunity for responding to disorderly injections from this Women in the Workplace Agency. I normally side of the chamber! would not rise on one of these matters— The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— Senator McGauran—Nor would I. Thank you for that advice, Senator Sherry! Senator HOGG—No, and I am sorry you Senator Sherry—My second point of or- did, Senator McGauran, because I think the der is that he promised this would be brief, Australian public, if they are listening, must and it has gone on far too long. be really quite ashamed of what they have The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— just heard in this chamber. As a person who The senator has his five minutes, Senator. has worked for a long period of time as a Senator McGAURAN—This has gone trade union official—for which I do not further than I thought, because the more I make and never have made any apology in dwell on the matter the more I see the ab- this chamber—let me just put you in your surdity in it. I am hoping—it is a feigned place. I will cite an example of something attempt—to try and get it across to the other that actually happened in a workplace and side. As I said, I will guarantee, Senator that I handled for a woman a number of

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 149 years ago. It was not under the regime that ment. Of course, the employment regime that you are endeavouring in put place now, but she suffered under was nowhere near as bad under a regime where there was supposedly as what is being advocated by this govern- greater protection for equal opportunity for ment under the bill currently before this women in the workplace than will exist post place. the passing of this legislation. Equal opportunity for women in the The particular case that I cite was of a workplace is important, but it has to be real young woman—and I have cited this case opportunity. It must not be something that is before in this chamber—who worked in a dreamed up in the minds of those who have retail outlet. As happens in some retail out- never experienced the difficulties these peo- lets, she was the sole employee engaged at ple suffer. The fact is that firstly she felt vul- any one time. She did not work for a very nerable because she was a woman. That is decent employer. Indeed, she worked for not to be patronising to her; that was her quite a reprehensible employer, as it turned frame of mind. The second thing about out, because this woman was not given the which she felt vulnerable was that it was a opportunity to have any breaks throughout job that she had to hold onto to meet her the day, whether it be to go to the toilet, to go commitments in the real world. The fact was for lunch or even to just have a break from that she knew that if she complained about the tedium of the job. The job meant she was her circumstances she would be dismissed. on her feet, being a retail employee, for most She would no longer have access to an in- of the day. come to give her the dignity that she was That might not sound so bad unless you reasonably entitled to—but she did not get are the person faced with that predicament. the dignity at work in the first place because She was faced with that predicament and the conditions there were aggressive towards also the predicament that, even with the pro- her wellbeing and betterment in this world. tections under the then existing legislation Whilst Senator McGauran made light of and the then existing award, if she went to the example used by my colleague Senator the union she knew she would be sacked Marshall, Senator Marshall nonetheless from that job. She had no protection at all, in made a valid statement. Again, my experi- her mind, because of the fear that, if she ence has shown in industries that dismissal went to the union just to get very basic, sim- can be used against people purely and simply ple conditions, she would be dismissed from on the basis of their sex, their age or any- her job. thing. The employer may choose anything To make it worse, Senator McGauran— that fits the bill for them to get rid of this and it is not a laughing matter—when this person, and they will use it. Senator McGau- woman went through her menstrual cycle ran, I advise you to get out there into the real and she was bleeding, she could not even get world and experience what real people have to the toilet to change her pads or do any- experienced and not rely on whatever comes thing else, so she had to suffer the ignominy out of the smoke-filled rooms on your side of of that in her employment, which is some- parliament. thing that you would not wish on anyone, Senator SHERRY (Tasmania) (7.17 particularly your own daughter, sister or pm)—On the same point— mother. Yet this was something that this woman had to put up with in her employ-

CHAMBER 150 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT the majority or, indeed, a considerable mi- (Senator Moore)—Equal opportunity for nority of employers engage in poor treatment women? of and behaviour towards their employees. Senator SHERRY—Yes, equal opportu- The Labor Party does not allege that. I seek nity for women. I am going to deal quite di- leave to continue my remarks later. rectly with the Equal Opportunity for Leave granted; debate interrupted. Women in the Workplace Agency report for Consideration 2005-06 and the issues raised. Just by way of The following orders of the day relating to response to that largely irrelevant speech government documents were considered: contributed by Senator McGauran from the National Party: I find it of passing interest Department of Defence—Report for 2004- that the only person on behalf of the Liberal- 05. Motion to take note of document moved by Senator Stephens. Debate ad- National Party government who can give any journed till Thursday at general business, sort of guarantee about the outcome of the Senator Stephens in continuation. industrial relations legislation is Senator Indigenous Business Australia—Report for McGauran, and the only guarantee given is 2004-05. Motion to take note of document that no-one will be sacked for chewing moved by Senator Stephens. Debate ad- chewing gum. That was the only guarantee journed till Thursday at general business, we could extract from a representative of the Senator Stephens in continuation. Liberal-National Party government. That General business orders of the day nos 18, 19 really does say a lot— and 20 relating to government documents Senator Marshall—We’re all relieved! were called on but no motion was moved. Senator SHERRY—I am sure we are all ADJOURNMENT relieved. What about a guarantee of no re- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ductions in penalty rates, shift loadings or (Senator Moore)—Order! It being 7.20 pm, public holidays? What about a guarantee of I propose the question: no reduction over time in the minimum That the Senate do now adjourn. wage, Senator McGauran? You seem to have Mr Hugh Dunn taken up the cause and been the personal emissary of the Prime Minister, Mr Howard. Senator TROOD (Queensland) (7.20 Why don’t you come in here and give a pm)—It is with great sadness that I advise guarantee on other issues, Senator McGau- the Senate of the death of a great Queen- ran? slander and servant of Australia, Mr Hugh Alexander Dunn. Mr Dunn was part of that Senator McGauran may not be aware that extraordinary generation of Australians who there have actually been a number of unfair joined the then Department of External Af- dismissal cases—I do not have the references fairs either during or in the aftermath of here but I will get them and bring them here World War II and who went on to lay the next week—involving the dismissal and re- foundations of an independent Australian instatement, fortunately, of individuals who foreign policy. They were an academically have eaten a sweet out of a broken sweet accomplished group of men and women and packet in shops. They have been summarily they had a strong belief that Australia should dismissed and reinstated. Whilst it is not have its own distinctive voice in interna- chewing gum, it is a very similar type of of- tional affairs. Hugh Dunn personified the fence. The Labor Party does not allege that best of them: dedicated to creating a profes-

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 151 sional foreign service and, as time went on, verse as Japan, New York, Washington, New especially committed to Australia’s closer Delhi and Saigon. engagement with Asia. During the 1960s Australia did not have Hugh was born in Rockhampton on 20 diplomatic relations with the People’s Re- August 1923. The Dunn family eventually public of China, so Hugh was frustrated in moved to Brisbane, where he was educated his efforts to put his expertise in Sinology to briefly at state schools and then at Brisbane professional use. An opportunity came, how- Boys College. At the college he was both an ever, in 1969 when he was appointed as Am- academic and an athletic star. He was captain bassador to the Republic of China on Tai- and dux in his final year and received col- wan. He served in Taipei until 1972 when, at ours for cricket, rowing, rugby and athletics. very short notice, he was required to close He was an especially talented rugby player, the Australian mission following the Whit- eventually representing Queensland. After lam government’s recognition of the People’s leaving school in 1942, Hugh was drawn by Republic in December 1972. Afterwards, the war into military service. He was at- Hugh hoped that he might be sent as Ambas- tached to General MacArthur’s headquarters sador to Beijing, but it was not to be. He was and was to become part of the first signals sent as head of mission to posts in South intelligence unit in Australia. He served with America and Africa. MacArthur in New Guinea and the Philip- Hugh finally realised his life’s ambition pines and after the war made his way to ex- when appointed by the Fraser government as otic locales in Asia, especially Japan and Ambassador to China in 1980. He served China. At the war’s conclusion he returned to there until 1984 and became one of Austra- Brisbane and a Bachelor of Arts degree at the lia’s great heads of mission to the Middle University of Queensland. It was here that Kingdom. His language skills and commit- Hugh began to explore the subject which was ment to Sinology as a field of study earned to become a defining dimension of his public him considerable respect and made him and private life: a fascination with China and widely popular in Beijing. It was with con- its place in the world. siderable pride that he often recounted that When he was announced as the Queen- he was the only Australian Ambassador to sland Rhodes Scholar for 1949, it gave him China who had visited all of the then 30 the opportunity to undertake Chinese lan- provinces. guage training at Oxford University, where Hugh’s posting came at a time of revolu- he studied with some of the most eminent tionary change in China. Deng Xiaoping had names in the field. He graduated with first- only recently returned to the Communist class honours in Chinese in 1952 with a the- Party leadership in Beijing and began turning sis that translated some of the poems of the Chinese communist orthodoxy on its head. It second century poet Cao Zhi. The translation was a period that required diplomats to em- was later published in both Taiwan and the ploy the classical analytical skills of the Si- People’s Republic. nologist. Most importantly, they needed to Hugh joined the Department of External decipher the opaque messages being con- Affairs for a brief period in 1952-53 and was veyed through China’s official media as to to return as a permanent officer in 1954. He the depth of the political and policy changes then spent over 30 years in the foreign ser- that were under way. Profound political sig- vice, with postings in places as widely di- nalling was invariably conveyed through

CHAMBER 152 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 historical and literary metaphor. It was in this schools. He served several terms as President milieu that Hugh’s skills and craft came to of the Queensland branch of the Australian the fore. His dispatches from Beijing were Institute of International Affairs. He returned invariably penetrating, stimulating, elegant to his old school, Brisbane Boys College, on and, above all, an accurate analysis of regular occasions and, when time permitted, China’s transformation. pursued his passions for golf, trout fishing, As China became more important to Aus- reading and conversation. tralia, Hugh was a man whose season had Perhaps one of his greatest legacies from come. He dedicated a lifetime of classical this time was his editorship of the Austra- scholarship to the analytical and diplomatic lians in Asia monograph series, published by needs of his country at a time of far-reaching Griffith University’s Centre for the Study of change in our region. He greatly admired Australia-Asia Relations. Hugh’s own mem- China for its history, the richness of its cul- oir, The Shaping of a Sinologue of Sorts, be- ture and its increasingly impressive eco- gan the series with a very personal and nomic accomplishments. He was, however, slightly whimsical account of his very active very hard-headed about its importance to life. Hugh was then responsible for bringing Australia and strongly disapproved of efforts 21 additional monographs to publication. to romanticise it. The relationship flourished, The series stands as one of Hugh’s most en- he held, because each country was of use and during legacies, providing a permanent re- of some importance to the other. Economics cord of Australia’s changing relations with was at the core, but, because more was Asia after the Second World War. needed to sustain a healthy relationship, he Hugh was a wise, witty, generous, humor- encouraged ties into other fields such as sci- ous, considerate and charming companion to ence, technology and culture. For the Austra- his very wide circle of friends. A man of lia-China relationship alone, the nation owes conservative tastes, he was a professional Hugh Dunn an immense debt. diplomat of the old school, serving govern- Beijing was Hugh’s last foreign affairs ments of both political persuasions with posting and he retired from the foreign ser- equal dedication. His wife, Marney, shared vice to take up a visiting professorship at the many of his life’s adventures, providing School of Modern Asian Studies at Griffith marvellous support in his diplomatic role and University in 1985. In the same year, he was becoming an equally devoted servant of Aus- also made an officer of the general division tralian diplomacy. They had an extraordinary of the Order of Australia. In the years that partnership which endured until Hugh’s re- followed, he was as dedicated an unremuner- cent death. ated public servant as he had been a profes- Hugh Dunn died in Brisbane on 5 No- sional diplomat. Griffith University was vember after a long illness. It was a mark of eventually to award him an honorary doctor- the esteem and affection in which he was ate, but well before this it became an institu- held in the community that his funeral in tional base for an extraordinarily full and Brisbane was attended by not only his family rich retirement, allowing him to engage his but a very wide circle of friends and col- many interests. leagues connected with his many life pur- He served on the Queensland China suits. He had a very rich and active life and Council, helping in particular to promote will be greatly missed by family and friends Chinese language teaching in Queensland alike. The nation should remember him as a

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 153 wise and devoted servant of Australian di- sides of the table. He recognised and nur- plomacy and a leader in Australia’s engage- tured talent—Bob Carr, Paul Keating, Gra- ment with Asia, especially China. ham Richardson and many others come to Mr John Patrick Ducker mind. He was mentor to a young Bob Carr, employing him as the education officer at the Senator STEPHENS (New South Wales) Labor Council. He took great pride in the (7.29 pm)—Tonight I wish to express my achievements of the Wran, Keating and Carr sincere condolences and those of the federal Labor governments, because John was also a parliamentary Labor Party to the family of proud and active member of the Australian John Ducker AO, a truly great figure in the Labor Party. Labor movement in New South Wales who passed away last Friday morning at the age He joined the Gladesville Ryde Branch in of 73. His was an active, generous and dedi- 1951, and later, following the death of his cated life as a family man, a union stalwart, a father in 1953, converted to Catholicism. He man of great faith and compassion, and a was elected as junior vice-president of the great servant of Australian people. New South Wales branch in 1966—a position he held until 1970, when he became John Ducker was 18 when he arrived from president, at a time when the party was in the Yorkshire in England in 1950 with his fam- political doldrums. His legacy to the party in ily, a beneficiary of the postwar immigration that role was a political organisation that had scheme launched by the Chifley Labor gov- been successfully restructured, laying the ernment. His first job was in an ironworks— foundation for a long period of electoral suc- a tough job in a new country—where, within cess at both federal and state levels. three years, he was elected as a union organiser with the Federated Ironworkers Associa- In chairing the New South Wales Austra- tion. In 1961, his skills and talents saw him lian Labor Party annual state conference—a appointed as an organiser with the Labor body of almost 1,000 delegates—he was re- Council of New South Wales, where his ca- nowned for his strategic sense, his shrewd reer blossomed, and he went on in 1967 to wit and his wonderful Yorkshire accent, become first the assistant secretary and then which he used to great effect. As president of the secretary of the New South Wales Labor the New South Wales branch, he was instru- Council, working closely with his friend and mental in the success in New South Wales of colleague Barry Unsworth. He also served as Labor’s 1972 ‘It’s time’ campaign and the vice-president of the Australian Council of election of the Whitlam government. Trade Unions. John Ducker entered the New South Wales John Ducker’s leadership of the trade un- Legislative Council in 1972 as a member of ion movement produced an era of stability the Labor opposition following the resigna- with a minimum of industrial disputes. He tion of Reg Downing. Over the next few was renowned for his skill in negotiating months he applied his skills to garner support solutions and compromise in what were re- for the then Legislative Council member garded as intractable negotiations. John was Neville Wran, enabling him to move to the smart. He was an accomplished debater and Legislative Assembly and then to be elected a master negotiator who provided leadership as Labor’s parliamentary leader. We are all to the trade union movement. He brought a indebted to John’s efforts, because the ulti- new level of integrity and professionalism to mate result was the Wranslide victory and a industrial relations practitioners on both Labor government that brought stability, en-

CHAMBER 154 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 ergy and renewal to the state of New South lacher MLC in remarking on one of John’s Wales. strengths said: John Ducker’s life was one of service. He was also prepared to make the tough decisions Following his exemplary service in the New irrespective of how unpopular they might have South Wales Legislative Council, he was been with some of his friends and peers at the appointed to the New South Wales Public time. Service Board, including serving a term as John’s community service was in many re- its chairman. He resigned this position when spects unsung. That is how he wanted it to the Greiner government was elected in 1988. be. He supported numerous charities and In 1979, he was admitted to the Order of organisations and was particularly supportive Australia. He was also a recipient of the of members of the New South Wales police prestigious award of papal knight from Pope force. Until recent months, John continued to John Paul II in recognition of his service to work behind the scenes, supporting these the church and the community. organisations and lobbying ministers and Speaking in the New South Wales Legisla- members of parliament on their behalf. tive Council on Tuesday evening, his politi- John’s influence spanned almost four dec- cal friends and opponents alike acknowl- ades. His abiding friendships with Barry edged John Ducker as man of great talent, Unsworth and Neville Wran endured the compassion and sincerity. New South Wales tests of time. Neville has described him as Special Minister of State John Della Bosca ‘the greatest Yorkshireman to arrive on these observed: shores since Captain Cook’—and indeed he He was a quick-witted debater, a master of per- was. Michael Costa MLC, who described suasion, a clever political thinker, a splendid ne- himself in his tribute to John Ducker as a gotiator and a skilled chairman ... he was a decent member of that exclusive club of former human being. New South Wales Labor Council secretaries, … … … said: Today many people in industry, commerce and John Ducker was a giant. He shaped modern La- the labour movement owe an immeasurable debt bor, he created the modern Labor Party and he to John Ducker. moved us away from the old ideological straight jacket that kept us out of government. He helped How ironic that here in this place we would modernise the party. He acted as a mentor. Even be debating some of the most profound in- though he dealt with a broad group he had an dustrial relations changes in living memory. incredible ability to make you feel like an impor- John Ducker remained intensely interested in tant person. In the passing of John Ducker we this legislation and the Howard government’s have lost somebody who was of great benefit to draconian proposals and continued to offer this society. his advice to John Robertson and Unions The community has broadly recognised the New South Wales about its impacts until the huge contribution of this great Australian. last few weeks of his life. John Ducker served on the board of many He was affectionately, and at times quite public and private companies and organisa- reverently, called ‘Bruvver Ducker’—a take tions. His sphere of influence was extraordi- on his wonderful accent. He was both narily wide, his grasp of issues was intellec- blessed and challenged to live in interesting tually rigorous and his reputation as an advo- times, fighting hard against those influences cate was fearsome. Yet, he was a dedicated that threatened our way of life. Michael Gal- family man. He and his wife Valerie shared

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 155

42 years of marriage, and had two sons, Paul have expressed their gratefulness. During and Anthony, of whom they were immensely that brief tour around Parliament House there proud. was the irony of the guide explaining a few John Ducker’s funeral and requiem mass of the features of this marvellous building will be held at the Sacred Heart Catholic that our parliament is housed in. The guide Church in Mona Vale on Friday at noon. It pointed out the copy of the Magna Carta that will be a celebration of his full life and the we have in the public area here in Parliament contribution of a great Australian to a coun- House. It is one of only three or four in the try that embraced him. He will be sadly world. It is a very ancient and very important missed by his family and his many friends. historical relic. Explaining what the Magna May he rest in peace. Carta was, the guide said that it was a document that is at the foundation of Australia’s Mr Robert Jovicic democracy and legal processes and guaran- Senator BARTLETT (Queensland) (7.38 tees that you cannot be detained without trial pm)—In speaking on a report a few minutes and without the judgment of your peers. To ago I highlighted how crucial the issues of tell that fact to a group of people who had due process, natural justice, procedural fair- been detained for up to four years by this ness and the rule of law are. They are impor- very government without charge or trial was tant, not because they are nice soundings irony in the extreme, I might say. But it concepts or nice theories, but because they shows the importance of those basic issues of are perhaps the most fundamental protection due process. against innocent people suffering great injus- I point to another example that has got tices. That is why, when we are looking at some coverage in recent times, and that is the the current debate around the anti-terrorism terrible situation faced by long-term Austra- legislation, so many people in our commu- lian resident, Mr Jovicic, who had lived in nity, including the Democrats, are very con- Australia since he was two years old. He was cerned about the potential of that legislation born, as I understand it, in France of parents to remove some of those basic issues of the of Serbian origin—or probably Yugoslavian rule of law. It is not by accident that they are origin at that stage. He ran afoul of the char- at the foundation of our democracy. They acter provisions of our Migration Act and, have been built up over many centuries, in- under a decision made by the previous minis- deed, in some respects, back to the Magna ter, was deported to Serbia where he had Carta in the 13th century. never been, had no knowledge of the lan- I had an ironic experience a few weeks guage and no connection with the country at ago in Parliament House. I was taking a all. In most people’s fair judgment that number of people who were refugees who would be considered an extreme penalty. had been imprisoned on Nauru by this gov- Whilst Mr Jovicic had been found guilty of ernment, for close to four years for some of drug related crimes and other offences under them, on a brief tour. Through all of that Australian law, he had been charged, tried process, not at any stage were they charged and had served his time for those offences. I with any offence—because they had not believe that it is a grossly disproportionate committed any—let alone had a trial. At the punishment for a person in that circumstance end of that process they were found to have to be sentenced, in effect, to what is perma- been refugees all along and allowed into the nent exile. That is what is often done to peo- country for which they are very grateful and ple in this circumstance. I am not saying that

CHAMBER 156 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 people should never have their visas can- of many of their senators that were expressed celled on character provisions, I am saying at the time, including quite eloquently by that the judgment about cancelling visas on former senator Barney Cooney. character provisions should be made in ac- I know it is always dangerous to quote cordance with all of the relevant facts, in- yourself, but I made some comments at the cluding whether or not it is a fair or propor- time, and the Democrats raised concerns, tionate action. about what it would mean for the culture that In this situation, and many other cases that this would promote in the immigration area. I am personally aware of, a person is, in ef- We specifically talked about the momentum fect, being sentenced to life long exile. It is towards a more negative culture in the mi- exile from their families, in some cases from gration area as a result of laws like this that their children, to a country where they have gave the minister more power and more dis- no language, no connection and no history, cretion. They removed the ability of merits other than with their ancestors. The exile can review of decisions by the minister if they be permanent because these people are pro- were made personally by the minister, and hibited from being able to re-enter the coun- thus allowed decisions like this one that try without the express permission of the could be driven and affected too much by minister. I believe exile of that sort is ex- politics and not enough by proper lawful treme punishment that should not be under- consideration. They were the concerns that taken in those circumstances unless there is a we expressed at the time. clear risk to the community here in Australia. As I often say in this chamber, it is impor- That has not applied on many of the occa- tant to remember that, when we pass legisla- sions when this power has been used. Be- tion, it is not just a mechanism of having an cause of the Jovicic case getting such public- intellectual debate; it is passing laws that can ity, and because of a number of other simi- affect people. The terrible plight that Mr larly unjust cases—or that appear unjust at Jovicic is in now—and well over 100 people least on the face of it—the Ombudsman is in various parts of the world—is a direct examining this area. I believe it will be an- consequence of the decision of the Senate to other area that will throw up a large number pass that piece of legislation over seven of cases that demonstrate what I believe is years ago. The vote for that law seven years extreme injustice on the part of the immigra- ago has directly caused the, I believe, seri- tion department and, in some cases, the rele- ously unjust suffering of Mr Jovicic and his vant minister. wider family. Because of this case getting such public- Of course, it is a lot harder in these cir- ity, I had cause to revisit the passage of the cumstances because you are in a position recent legislation that allowed this to happen. where you are seen to be publicly defending It was almost seven years to the day, 25 No- people who are convicted of crimes, and november 1998, when this Senate chamber, to body wants to be seen to be defending drug its shame, passed the Migration Legislation addicts or people who have committed vio- Amendment (Strengthening of Provisions lent crimes to feed a drug habit or those sorts relating to Character and Conduct) Bill 1998. of things. But it is certainly not a matter of It was one of those, unfortunately, frequent defending their actions; it is a matter of de- occasions when the Labor Party caved in to fending the principle. The reason that we political pressure from the coalition and sup- defend that principle of due process and ported that legislation, despite the misgivings

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 157 proper lawful consideration of decisions Young Workers Legal Service rather than political decisions being made by Working Women’s Centre of South politicians is that, once it is allowed to hap- Australia pen to some people, it can happen to oth- Senator McEWEN (South Australia) ers—and it can happen to any of us. (7.48 pm)—Tonight I wish to bring the Sen- I draw attention to the case I mentioned ate’s attention to two important publications before; that is, the ruling in the Full Federal that came to my attention during the last Court in S214 versus the Minister for Immi- non-sitting period. I refer to the 2004-05 an- gration and Multicultural and Indigenous nual reports of two fine South Australian Affairs in 2004. It was a successful ruling, organisations: the Young Workers Legal Ser- thankfully, where a person was found to have vice and the Working Women’s Centre of been denied procedural fairness by the Ad- South Australia. During a time when indus- ministrative Appeals Tribunal—although I trial relations is at the forefront of public might say that, originally, that decision was debate, the work of the Young Workers Legal found to be lawful by the first appeal to the Service and the Working Women’s Centre single Federal Court judge—where a person remind us just how much is at stake for two had allegations raised against them that they of the most vulnerable sectors of Australia’s were not able to defend themself against. The work force—young people and women— same thing can happen and does happen un- because of the government’s extreme, ideo- der section 501—the character provisions— logically driven attacks on the working con- of the Migration Act, where people are auto- ditions of all Australians. Both the Young matically deemed to be of bad character be- Workers Legal Service and the Working cause of their record, and the onus of proof is Women’s Centre advocate for and seek re- reversed and they have to prove otherwise, dress on behalf of their clients who have or if an assessment is made by ASIO that been wrongly treated by employers. The they should be excluded on security grounds work these two organisations do—and do so they may not have any opportunity to defend well—consistently highlights the need for themselves against the allegations and they accessible, enforceable laws to prevent ex- may not even know what the allegations are, ploitation of workers by employers. as occurred in that Federal Court case and The South Australian Young Workers Le- the AAT case I referred to. gal Service was set up by the South Austra- That is a principle that can apply to any of lian union movement in 2003 to assist work- us. It can apply now under the ASIO laws. It ers under 30 years of age who were not can apply even more under some of the laws members of trade unions to pursue work- that the Senate has before it and will con- place grievances such as unfair dismissal, sider shortly where anonymous allegations underpayment of wages, equal opportunity can be made against any member of the and discrimination matters, traineeship and community and they can have legal actions apprenticeship disputes, workers compensa- taken against them as a consequence, despite tion and occupational health and safety mat- not even knowing what those allegations are, ters. The service provided is free for clients let alone having an opportunity to defend and funding to enable the service to operate them. That is why we should never accept is provided by the South Australian govern- principles such as those that are embodied in ment and the South Australian trade union the legislation—(Time expired) movement.

CHAMBER 158 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

That is the same trade union movement for employers to be able to sack young peo- that is constantly vilified by those opposite ple for no reason at all. who like to paint trade unionists as dinosaurs Returning to the statistics from the Young of the Dark Ages. Perhaps those opposite Workers Legal Service report, 27 per cent of might like to look in the mirror sometime clients were assisted with underpayment of and see where the real dinosaurs are. The wages claims and 15 per cent were assisted South Australian trade union movement is with equal opportunity matters. Fifty-five per modern, forward-looking and practical. It cent of the service’s clients were female and saw that young people needed a cheap, con- 50 per cent of the young people assisted fidential, accessible place to get advice about worked in either hospitality or retail. As ei- what had happened to them at work, and so ther a measure of the success of the Service the Young Workers Legal Service was born. or perhaps a reminder of how vulnerable As well as assisting young people with young people are to exploitation, the total their individual problems, the service also moneys recovered for clients of the service provides a resource centre with copies of from various actions in tribunals and by con- awards, acts and video and DVD materials. It ciliation was $147,000. The Young Workers also provides speakers for schools to provide Legal Service notes in its 2004-05 annual information about the world of work and has report that it expects a third of its work to an informative monthly radio segment. The disappear in 2006 when the right of employ- Young Workers Legal Service employs one ees working for employers with 100 or fewer or two experienced industrial practitioners, employees to bring and unfair dismissal but the bulk of its casework is handled by claim is removed. No doubt that brings great volunteer law students from both Flinders joy to those opposite. I can tell you it brings and Adelaide universities. The support of the despair to Labor senators, who believe in a law schools of both those South Australian fair go for our young people at work. universities for the service is acknowledged, While many people have done much to es- and it is appropriate that honourable senators tablish the South Australian Young Workers also acknowledge the goodwill and hard Legal Service, and to ensure its success, I work of the many young law students who would draw senators’ attention to the efforts willingly give their own time and expertise of its initial coordinator, Emma Thornton; because, basically, they want to make the her successor, Olivia Guarna; the Secretary world a better place for other young people. of SA Unions, Janet Giles; and the executive From the annual report of the Young of SA Unions, who collectively saw the Workers Legal Service I am able to advise need, had the vision and brought it to frui- that of the 158 young people for whom the tion. service undertook some action in the 12- The Working Women’s Centre of South month reporting period, 30 per cent were Australia has a somewhat longer history than assisted with unfair dismissal matters. Al- the Young Workers Legal Service. In 2004- most all of these were employed in work- 05, it celebrated 26 years of service to South places of fewer than 100 employees and Australian women. It too offers assistance when this government’s extreme legislation with individual grievances such as unfair is shoved through the Senate those young dismissal and with equal opportunity mat- people who need help will be denied help ters, along with advice about Australian because the government thinks it is just fine workplace agreements, underpayment of

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 159 wages, workers compensation and health and work being done by the centre, much of safety matters. During the reporting period, which goes unrecognised. The centre has the Working Women’s Centre secured more always been a fierce advocate for the rights than $270,000 in entitlements and compensa- of outworkers, and was successful in having tion for women in South Australia who set- new protections for outworkers included in tled their matters with the assistance of the the new South Australian Fair Work Act. The centre. Some of this compensation was for fate of those provisions now hangs in the women who asked the centre to assist them balance, given that the federal government’s take action against employers who had un- dream of taking over the states’ industrial fairly dismissed them. The annual report systems is about to become a reality. cites a number of case studies. Currently, the centre is participating in a As those opposite are soon going to legis- project to develop health and safety guide- late away the right of women working for lines for workers in hairdressing salons. The employers with fewer than 100 employees to project is addressing such matters as working take unfair dismissal action, it is salient to with hazardous substances—and there are remind all senators of what happens out there numerous hazardous substances in hairdress- in the real world where not all employers ing salons. It is also assisting in developing play fair. This is the story of Serena, a client guidelines for dealing with workplace bully- of the Working Women’s Centre. Serena had ing in hairdressing salons. Another important been working in a clerical capacity for four project the centre has been involved in is a years. She was full-time permanent em- joint research project with the University of ployee and was of mature age. She worked in South Australia into the impact of domestic the construction industry in a male domi- violence on women workers. As the annual nated workplace and she assisted a number report notes, women who are subject to do- of the supervisors and managers with their mestic violence often go off to work each administration. day and try to conduct a normal working life With no notice, Serena was dismissed. She while subject to unimaginable stress from was simply called into the office and told violence at home. that her performance was not up to scratch The Working Women’s Centre is funded and that they were going to have to let her by both the state and federal governments go. No-one had told her before this happened and receives some funding from the South that there was an issue with her performance, Australian union movement. The centre and it deeply affected her confidence and raises additional funding by conducting self-esteem. Serena lodged an unfair dis- training courses. The centre’s expertise in missal claim and was awarded compensa- addressing workplace bullying was recog- tion. Having the opportunity to file an unfair nised in November 2004 when a representa- dismissal application meant that Serena was tive presented a paper on the issue at Work- able to move on from this experience. The Congress6 held in Rome. I would like to financial compensation also assisted her make mention of my admiration and respect through this difficult patch. for the hardworking staff of the Working The Working Women’s Centre also has a Women’s Centre of South Australia under the very important role in enhancing women’s leadership of its current director, Sandra participation and contribution in workplaces. Dann. It is worth noting some of the innovative

CHAMBER 160 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Both the Working Women’s Centre and tions—Amendment to annexes the Young Workers Legal Service manage to [F2005L03697]*. provide exemplary services to the people of Broadcasting Services Act—Broadcasting South Australia and they do it with not much Services (International Broadcasting) funding but with an extraordinary amount of Guidelines 2005 [F2005L03712]*. passion and perseverance. I am very pleased Customs Act— to bring the work of the two organisations to Customs By-laws Nos— the attention of honourable senators. 0540005 [F2005L03751]*. Senate adjourned at 7.58 pm 0540006 [F2005L03748]*. DOCUMENTS Tariff Concession Revocation Instru- Tabling ment— The following government documents 23/2005 [F2005L03731]*. were tabled: 24/2005 [F2005L03732]*. Australian Industry Development Corpora- 25/2005 [F2005L03733]*. tion—Report for 2004-05. 26/2005 [F2005L03734]*. Australian Institute of Health and Wel- 27/2005 [F2005L03735]*. fare—Australia’s welfare 2005—Seventh 28/2005 [F2005L03737]*. biennial report. Defence Act, Naval Defence Act and Air Australian Public Service Commission— Force Act—Select Legislative Instrument State of the Service—Report for 2004-05. 2005 No. 276—Defence (Inquiry) Federal Court of Australia—Report for Amendment Regulations 2005 (No. 2) 2004-05. [F2005L03686]*. Federal Magistrates Court—Report for Financial Management and Accountability 2004-05. Act—Adjustments of Appropriations on Fisheries Research and Development Cor- Change of Agency Functions—Directions poration—Report for 2004-05. Nos— Human Rights and Equal Opportunity 10 of 2005-2006 [F2005L03709]*. Commission—Report for 2004-05. 11 of 2005-2006 [F2005L03715]*. International Labour Organisation— Food Standards Australia New Zealand Submission report on ILO instruments Act—Direction under section 11, dated adopted in June 2004. 28 October 2005; and statement of reasons. National Capital Authority—Report for Higher Education Support Act— 2004-05. Commonwealth Grant Scheme Guidelines, Tabling dated 26 November 2005 [F2005L03802]*. The following documents were tabled by the Clerk: National Health Act— Arrangement No. PB 36 of 2005— [Legislative instruments are identified by a Chemotherapy Pharmaceuticals Access Federal Register of Legislative Instruments Program [F2005L03742]*. (FRLI) number] Declaration No. PB 30 of 2005 Banking Act—Banking (Foreign Ex- [F2005L03723]*. change) Regulations 1959—Direction relating to foreign currency transactions and Determination No. PB 32 of 2005 to Zimbabwe; and variations of exemp- [F2005L03727]*.

CHAMBER Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 161

Private Health Insurance Complaints Levy Act—Select Legislative Instrument 2005 No. 274—Private Health Insurance Com- plaints Levy Amendment Regulations 2005 (No. 1) [F2005L03690]*. * Explanatory statement tabled with legislative instrument.

CHAMBER 162 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE The following answers to questions were circulated:

Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry: Staff (Question No. 656) Senator Chris Evans asked the Minister representing the Minister for Agriculture, Fisher- ies and Forestry, upon notice, on 4 May 2005: For each of the financial years 2000-01 to 2004-05 to date, can the following information be provided for the department and/or its agencies: (1) What were the base and top level salaries of Australian Public Service (APS) level 1 to 6 officers and equivalent staff employed. (2) What were the base and top level salaries of APS Executive level and Senior Executive Service officers and equivalent staff employed. (3) Are APS officers eligible for performance or other bonuses; if so: (a) to what levels are these bonuses applied; (b) are these applied on an annual basis; (c) what conditions are placed on the qualification for these bonuses; and (d) how many bonuses were paid at each level, and what was their dollar value for the periods specified above. (4) (a) How many senior officers have been supplied with motor vehicles; and (b) what has been the cost to date. (5) (a) How many senior officers have been supplied with mobile phones; and (b) what has been the cost to date. (6) How many management retreats or training programs have staff attended. (7) How many management retreats or training programs have been held off-site. (8) In the case of each off-site management retreat or training program: (a) where was the event held; and (b) what was the cost of: (i) accommodation, (ii) food, (iii) alcohol, (iv) transport, and (v) other costs incurred. (9) How many official domestic trips have been undertaken by staff and what was the cost of this domestic travel, and in each case: (a) what was the destination; (b) what was the purpose of the travel; and (c) what was the cost of the travel, including a breakdown of: (i) accommodation, (ii) food, (iii) alcohol, (iv) transport, and (v) other costs incurred. (10) How many official overseas trips have been undertaken by staff and what was the cost of this travel, and in each case: (a) what was the destination; (b) what was the purpose of the travel; and (c) what was the cost of the travel, including a breakdown of: (i) accommodation, (ii) food, (iii) alcohol, (iv) transport, and (v) other costs incurred. (11) (a) What was the total cost of air charters used; and (b) on how many occasions was aircraft char- tered, and in each case, what was the name of the charter company that provided the service and the respective costs. Senator Ian Macdonald—The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question: (1) Senator Abetz, representing Mr Andrews to respond on behalf of all Ministers. (2) Senator Abetz, representing Mr Andrews to respond on behalf of all Ministers. (3) Senator Abetz, representing Mr Andrews to respond on behalf of all Ministers. (4) Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF)

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 163

Financial Year Number of Motor Vehicles Cost Provided to SES Officers 2000/01 61 $748,830.51 2001/02 65 $724,321.00 2002/03 51 $563,482.00 2003/04 68 $631,819.20 2004/05 65 $644,535.00 Note: The above data has been obtained from FBT reports supplied by the department’s corporate finance systems. Other Portfolio Agencies Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation Financial Year Number of Motor Vehicles Cost Provided to Officers 2000/01 8 $147,535 2001/02 9 $185,153 2002/03 9 $208,292 2003/04 9 $183,403 2004/05 10 $228,892 Australian Fisheries Management Authority Financial Year Number of Motor Vehicles Cost Provided to Officers 2000/01 4 $63,438 2001/02 4 $55,778 2002/03 4 $61,734 2003/04 4 $56,853 2004/05 4 $55,227 Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority - Nil Wheat Export Authority - Nil Cotton Research and Development Corporation Financial Year Number of Motor Vehicles Cost Provided to Officers 2000/01 1 $13,336.44 2001/02 1 $13,172.64 2002/03 1 $12,498.78 2003/04 1 $10,826.73 2004/05 1 $12,530.53 Fisheries Research and Development Corporation - Nil Forest and Wood Products Research and Development Corporation - Nil Grains Research and Development Corporation - Nil Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation (GWRDC) GWRDC have advised that the requested information is not readily available and would require a significant diversion of resources to compile. Land and Water Australia - Nil Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC)

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 164 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Financial Year Number of Motor Vehicles Cost Provided to Officers 2000/01 4 $22,001 2001/02 2 $12,229 2002/03 3 $18,220 2003/04 3 $16,865 2004/05 1 $8,715 Sugar Research and Development Corporation Financial Year Number of Motor Vehicles Cost Provided to Officers 2000/01 5 $16,598.91 2001/02 4 $36,693.50 2002/03 3 $7,961.04 2003/04 3 $35,616.19 2004/05 3 $7,210.26 Note: The above data represents the change-over price for vehicles, as SRDC purchases vehicles. (5) Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Information specifying how many senior officers have been supplied with mobile phones and their costs for the financial years 2000-01 to 2004-05 to date is not readily available and would require a significant diversion of resources to compile. The Departments policy for the provision and management of mobile telephones is set out in DAFF Chief Executive Instruction 11 (CEI). The CEI defines the overarching principles, policy and business rules that apply to the provision and usage of departmental communications and information technology equipment and services. Other Portfolio Agencies Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation Financial Year Number of Officers with mobile Cost phones 2000/01 12 $19,920 2001/02 16 $27,957 2002/03 17 $29,429 2003/04 17 $30,978 2004/05 18 $33,374 Australian Fisheries Management Authority Financial Year Number of Officers with mobile Cost phones 2000/01 4 $3,306 2001/02 4 $3,057 2002/03 4 $3,091 2003/04 4 $3,945 2004/05 4 $10,082 Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority Financial Year Number of Officers with mobile Cost phones 2000/01 4 $1,837 2001/02 5 $3,202

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 165

Financial Year Number of Officers with mobile Cost phones 2002/03 7 $3,105 2003/04 7 $1,760 2004/05 7 $1,547 Wheat Export Authority Financial Year Number of Officers with mobile Cost phones 2000/01 1 $3,246 (Y/E 30/09/01) 2001/02 1 $1,263 (Y/E 30/09/02) 2002/03 1 $1,490 (Y/E 30/09/03) 2003/04 1 $3,422 (Y/E 30/09/04) 2004/05 2 $2,650 (to 11/07/05) Cotton Research and Development Corporation Financial Year Number of Officers with mobile Cost phones 2000/01 1 $825.38 2001/02 1 $752.96 2002/03 1 $1,281.89 2003/04 1 $1,736.69 2004/05 1 $1,638.83 Fisheries Research and Development Corporation Financial Year Number of Officers with mobile Cost phones 2000/01 0 $0 2001/02 0 $0 2002/03 2 $986 2003/04 0 $0 2004/05 0 $0 Forest and Wood Products Research and Development Corporation Financial Year Number of Officers with mobile Cost phones 2000/01 2 $2,300 2001/02 4 $2,900 2002/03 3 $2,000 2003/04 3 $1,800 2004/05 3 $2,900 Grains Research and Development Corporation Financial Year Number of Officers with mobile Cost phones 2000/01 11 $13,241.57 (ex GST) 2001/02 13 $9,003.37 (ex GST) 2002/03 14 $7,320.96 (ex GST) 2003/04 13 $6,554.15 (ex GST) 2004/05 8 $3,454.77 (ex GST)

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 166 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation Information specifying how many senior officers have been supplied with mobile phones and their costs for the financial years 2000-01 to 2004-05 to date is not readily available and would require a significant diversion of resources to compile. Land and Water Australia* Financial Year Number of Officers with mobile Cost phones 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 6 $1,750 * Information specifying how many senior officers have been supplied with mobile phones and their costs for the financial years 2000-01 to 2003-04 is not readily available and would require a significant diversion of resources to compile. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation Information specifying how many senior officers have been supplied with mobile phones and their costs for the financial years 2000-01 to 2004-05 to date is not readily available and would require a significant diversion of resources to compile. Sugar Research and Development Corporation Financial Year Number of Officers with mobile Cost phones 2000/01 6 $3,058.56 2001/02 5 $2,145.92 2002/03 5 $2,523.93 2003/04 4 $2,781.80 2004/05 6 $2,468.16 (6) to (10) Senator Abetz, representing Mr Andrews, will respond to these parts. Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Financial Year Total Cost of Air Charter 2000/01 No figures available for this financial year 2001/02 $96,517.58 2002/03 $270,644.90 2003/04 $999,487.49 2004/05 (to 24 May 05) $2,297,533.20 DOMESTIC AIR CHARTER 2001/2002 Name Value Number of Year Charters Anindilyakwa Air Pty Ltd $3,447.27 1 2001/2002 Cape York Airlines Pty Ltd $8,787.09 1 2001/2002 Jayrow Helicopters Pty Ltd $16,818.18 1 2001/2002 Laynhapuy Aviation Pty Ltd $13,452.73 5 2001/2002 Narromine Aviation $8,822.35 1 2001/2002 Skytrans Airlines $2,181.00 1 2001/2002 South West Air Service Pty Ltd $2,205.56 1 2001/2002

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 167

Name Value Number of Year Charters Brindabella Airlines $19,956.00 6 2001/2002 Corporate Air $7,900.00 1 2001/2002 Pays Air Service Pty Ltd $12,505.05 1 2001/2002 Sharon Bell $442.35 1 2001/2002 Total $96,517.58

DOMESTIC AIR CHARTER 2002/2003 Name Value Number of Year Charters Aerotropics Air Service $523.23 1 2002/2003 Alligator Airways $0 *2 2002/2003 Anindilyakwa Air Pty Ltd $1,941.25 1 2002/2003 Gemair Pty Ltd $4,763.64 1 2002/2003 Northern Air Services Pty Ltd $8,680.00 4 2002/2003 Skytrans Airlines $59,301.23 6 2002/2003 Agriculture WA $3,693.18 1 2002/2003 Anindilyakwa Air Pty Ltd $2,086.36 1 2002/2003 Barrier Aviation Pty Ltd $1,290.00 1 2002/2003 Brindabella Airlines $78,205.45 17 2002/2003 Cape York Airlines Pty Ltd $8,318.18 1 2002/2003 Hempels Aviation Pty Ltd $500.00 1 2002/2003 Independent Aviation Pty Ltd $3,566.36 1 2002/2003 Laynhapuy Aviation Pty Ltd $5,580.00 1 2002/2003 Northern Air Charter $21,381.86 30 2002/2003 Orange Aviation Pty Ltd $636.36 1 2002/2003 Planet Aviation $2,640.00 1 2002/2003 Skytrans Airlines $5,019.00 4 2002/2003 Sudholz Air Charter Pty Ltd $4,317.95 2 2002/2003 Aerotropics Air Service $4,320.50 1 2002/2003 BB Helicopters & Fitzroy Helicopters $2,236.00 1 2002/2003 Jayrow Helicopters Pty Ltd $51,644.35 5 2002/2003 Total $270,644.90 * The service was cancelled. DOMESTIC AIR CHARTER 2003/2004 Name Value Number of Year Charters Arkaroola Wilderness Sanctuary $4,221.83 5 2003/2004 Brindabella Airlines $16,615.45 1 2003/2004 Cape York Airlines Pty Ltd $39,974.54 3 2003/2004 Corporate Air $13,581.82 1 2003/2004 Direct Air Charter $2,406.00 1 2003/2004 Gulf Line Aviation $2,860.91 1 2003/2004 Jayrow Helicopters Pty Ltd $20,762.50 1 2003/2004 Narromine Aviation $14,328.46 4 2003/2004 Skytrans Airlines $3,707.09 3 2003/2004 South West Air Service Pty Ltd $39,705.64 9 2003/2004

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 168 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Name Value Number of Year Charters St George Air Farmers P/L T/A Jones Air $27,661.08 1 2003/2004 Brindabella Airlines $21,970.91 4 2003/2004 Broome Aviation $1,972.73 1 2003/2004 Cape Air Transport $11,746.37 5 2003/2004 Corporate Air $21,281.82 2 2003/2004 Honeycombe Holdings Pty Ltd $663.90 1 2003/2004 Laynhapuy Aviation Pty Ltd $236.36 1 2003/2004 Northern Air Charter $13,979.59 17 2003/2004 Qantas Airways Ltd $570.45 1 2003/2004 Sudholz Air Charter Pty Ltd $26,252.36 1 2003/2004 Buzz Aviation $36,906.00 1 2003/2004 Commercial Helicopters Pty Ltd $100,937.10 3 2003/2004 Gyrovision $20,330.10 1 2003/2004 Heli-Aust Pty Ltd $56,614.50 2 2003/2004 Heliwork WA Pty Ltd $14,867.00 2 2003/2004 Jayrow Helicopters Pty Ltd $19,828.50 3 2003/2004 MI Helicopters $78,752.82 7 2003/2004 Reid Heliwork Pty Ltd $57,705.26 4 2003/2004 Reef Helicopters Pty Ltd $2,050.00 1 2003/2004 Field Air (Operations) P/L $81,312.60 1 2003/2004 Keyland Aviation $103,935.75 7 2003/2004 Rebel Ag Pty Ltd $41,469.00 4 2003/2004 St George Air Farmers P/L T/A Jones Air $65,939.05 2 2003/2004 Thompson Aviation $34,340.00 4 2003/2004 Total $999,487.49 DOMESTIC AIR CHARTER 2004/2005 Name Value Number of Year Charters Air Bush Charter $39,046.39 8 2004/2005 Broome Air Services $2,090.00 1 2004/2005 Cape York Airlines Pty Ltd $52,909.09 1 2004/2005 Yolnu Air $372.73 1 2004/2005 Gordon L Robertson $67,507.10 8 2004/2005 Griffith Aero Club $51,973.93 6 2004/2005 Hardy Aviation (NT) P/L $2,636.36 1 2004/2005 JR & LD Bryant Holdings $16,030.35 1 2004/2005 Mon Aero Pty Ltd $6,470.25 2 2004/2005 Qantas Airways Ltd $2,272.73 1 2004/2005 Regional Pacific Airline Pty Ltd $5,000.00 1 2004/2005 Skytrans Airlines $3,694.00 2 2004/2005 South West Air Service Pty Ltd $17,561.28 3 2004/2005 Air South Pty Ltd $3,372.73 1 2004/2005 Brindabella Airlines $5,093.64 2 2004/2005 Broome Aviation $4,347.76 10 2004/2005 Cape York Airlines Pty Ltd $1,609.09 1 2004/2005 Corporate Air $1,145.45 1 2004/2005 Direct Air Charter $2,568.00 1 2004/2005

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 169

Name Value Number of Year Charters Gemair Pty Ltd $8,627.52 1 2004/2005 Hempels Aviation Pty Ltd $1,318.18 1 2004/2005 King Leopold Air $809.09 2 2004/2005 Northern Air Charter $39,756.37 46 2004/2005 Regional Pacific Airline Pty Ltd $16,930.53 1 2004/2005 BB Helicopters & Fitzroy Helicopters $1,620.00 1 2004/2005 Central (QLD)Aviation Pty Ltd $216,966.26 5 2004/2005 Commercial Helicopters Pty Ltd $291,708.77 4 2004/2005 Gulf Line Aviation $23,468.48 2 2004/2005 Heli Air Pty Ltd $183,599.80 4 2004/2005 Heli Surveys Pty Ltd $7,303.25 1 2004/2005 Heli-Aust Pty Ltd $349,238.71 7 2004/2005 Heliwork WA Pty Ltd $3,400.00 1 2004/2005 Jayrow Helicopters Pty Ltd $14,421.50 3 2004/2005 Laynhapuy Aviation Pty Ltd $8,300.00 2 2004/2005 Reid Heliwork Pty Ltd $42,930.00 2 2004/2005 Field Air (Operations) P/L $283,761.52 9 2004/2005 Forest Air Helicopters $36,491.07 1 2004/2005 Keyland Aviation $69,556.62 2 2004/2005 Lachlan Aerowork $17,909.55 2 2004/2005 Rebel Ag Pty Ltd $268,150.75 8 2004/2005 St George Air Farmers P/L T/A Jones Air $42,417.85 2 2004/2005 Thompson Aviation $83,146.50 10 2004/2005 Total $2,297,533.20 Other Portfolio Agencies Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation Name Value Number of Year Charters 0 2000-01 0 2001-02 Air Charter Australia $8,128 2 2002-03 0 2003-04 0 2004-05 Total $8,128 Australian Fisheries Management Authority Name Value Number of Year Charters Airnorth $9,351 1 2000-01 0 2001-02 0 2002-03 0 2003-04 Pearl Aviation $8,550 1 2004-05 Total $17,901

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 170 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority Name Value Number of Year Charters 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Corporate Air $12,420 1 2003-04 2004-05 Total $12,420 Wheat Export Authority - Nil Cotton Research and Development Corporation Name Value Number of Year Charters Kaputar Aviation $855.00 1 2000-01 Central Highlands Air Transport $6,352.91 2 McAlister Airways $1,491.60 1 Austrek Aviation $7,690.55 3 Brindabella Airlines $6,622.00 2 Corporate Air $6,900.00 2 Sudholz Air $4,312.00 1 Ostwald Bros $3,183.00 1 Great Western Aviation $2,178.00 1 Total $39,585.06 Central Highlands Air Charter $4,297.10 2 2001-02 Austrek Aviation $13,574.05 4 Airlink Pty Ltd 1 $1,584.00 1 McAlister Airways $1,869.05 1 Central Highlands Air Charter $4,297.10 2 Total $25,621.30 Austrek Aviation $15,097.60 5 2002-03 Tranbee Aviation $1,607.30 1 Corporate Air $2,280.00 1 Total $18,984.90 Austrek Aviation $5,859.18 1 2003-04 Total $5,859.18 Kaputar Aviation $9,437.72 3 2004-05 Central Highlands Air Transport $5,248.55 1 Austrek Aviation $10,343.67 1 Armidale Airways $2,680.00 1 Total $27,709.94 Total $117,760.38 Fisheries Research and Development Corporation - Nil Forest and Wood Products Research and Development Corporation - Nil

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 171

Grains Research and Development Corporation Name Value Number of Year Charters Adagold Aviation $13,185.00 (ex GST) 5 2000-01 Adagold Aviation $35,386.90 (ex GST) 5 2001-02 Adagold Aviation $8,036.00 (ex GST) 2 2002-03 Adagold Aviation $29,375.00 (ex GST) 7 2003-04 0 2004-05 Total $85,982.90 (ex GST) Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation Information specifying how many domestic charters have been used and their costs for the financial years 2000-01 to 2004-05 to date is not readily available and would require a significant diversion of resources to compile. Land and Water Australia Information specifying how many domestic charters have been used and their costs for the financial years 2000-01 to 2004-05 to date is not readily available and would require a significant diversion of resources to compile. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation - Nil. Sugar Research and Development Corporation - Nil. Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry: Staff (Question No. 665) Senator Chris Evans asked the Minister representing the Minister for Agriculture, Fisher- ies and Forestry, upon notice, on 4 May 2005: For each of the financial years 2000-01 to 2004-05 to date, can the following information be provided for the department and/or its agencies: (1) What were the base and top level salaries of Australian Public Service (APS) level 1 to 6 officers and equivalent staff employed. (2) What were the base and top level salaries of APS Executive level and Senior Executive Service officers and equivalent staff employed. (3) Are APS officers eligible for performance or other bonuses; if so: (a) to what levels are these bonuses applied; (b) are these applied on an annual basis; (c) what conditions are placed on the qualification for these bonuses; and (d) how many bonuses were paid at each level, and what was their dollar value for the periods specified above. (4) (a) How many senior officers have been supplied with motor vehicles; and (b) what has been the cost to date. (5) (a) How many senior officers have been supplied with mobile phones; and (b) what has been the cost to date. (6) How many management retreats or training programs have staff attended. (7) How many management retreats or training programs have been held off-site. (8) In the case of each off-site management retreat or training program: (a) where was the event held; and (b) what was the cost of: (i) accommodation, (ii) food, (iii) alcohol, (iv) transport, and (v) other costs incurred.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 172 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

(9) How many official domestic trips have been undertaken by staff and what was the cost of this domestic travel, and in each case: (a) what was the destination; (b) what was the purpose of the travel; and (c) what was the cost of the travel, including a breakdown of: (i) accommodation, (ii) food, (iii) alcohol, (iv) transport, and (v) other costs incurred. (10) How many official overseas trips have been undertaken by staff and what was the cost of this travel, and in each case: (a) what was the destination; (b) what was the purpose of the travel; and (c) what was the cost of the travel, including a breakdown of: (i) accommodation, (ii) food, (iii) alcohol, (iv) transport, and (v) other costs incurred. (11) (a) What was the total cost of air charters used; and (b) on how many occasions was aircraft char- tered, and in each case, what was the name of the charter company that provided the service and the respective costs. Senator Ian Macdonald—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) to (3) Senator Abetz, representing Mr Andrews to respond on behalf of all Ministers. (4) to (5) See answer to Senate Question on Notice number 656. (6) to (10) Senator Abetz, representing Mr Andrews to respond on behalf of all Ministers. (11) See answer to Senate Question on Notice number 656. Australian Federal Police: Manager International Network (Question No. 1059) Senator Ludwig asked the Minister for Justice and Customs, upon notice, on 4 August 2005 With reference to the matters that were referred to the Director of International and Operations: (1) For each of the years 2001 to date: (a) how many matters were referred; and (b) to which countries did these matters relate. (2) What action was taken on these matters? (3) Of these matters, how many were referred to: (a) the Minister for Justice and Customs; and (b) the Attorney-General. (4) Of those matters referred to the Minister for Justice and Customs and the Attorney-General, what action was taken? (5) Was the Bali 9 case referred to: (a) the Director of International and Operations; (b) the Minister for Justice and Customs; or (c) the Attorney-General; if so, what action was taken in relation to that specific matter. (6) (a) Can a copy be provided of the current mutual assistance manual used to cover informal police- to-police assistance rendered before charge; (b) when was this manual last revised; (c) are any revisions currently being undertaken; and (d) are any revisions planned. (7) Are the mutual assistance procedures different in countries with the death penalty to those countries without the death penalty; if so, what is the difference; if not, why not. Senator Ellison—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (1) For the periods where data is held it is not in a format readily adaptable for the question and would consequently take an undue diversion of resources to prepare. On this basis it is not proposed to answer this question. (2) See answer to question 1. (3) See answer to question 1. (4) See answer to question 1.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Wednesday, 30 November 2005 SENATE 173

(5) (a) The AFP Manager International Network (previously known as Director International Opera- tions) was involved in the operational decisions relating to the provision of information to the Indonesian National Police (INP). As a result of operational discussions, authorisation was provided to convey information to the INP through the AFP’s International Network liaison officer based in Bali. (b) The AFP’s first briefing to the Minister for Justice and Customs in relation to this police operation occurred directly after the 17 April 2005 arrest of the Australians in Bali. No member of the Australian government was briefed prior to this time. As a matter of policy the Minister is not advised of operational decisions prior to the resolution of the operation. (c) The AFP’s first briefing to the Attorney General in relation to this police operation occurred directly after the 17 April 2005 arrest of the Australians in Bali. No member of the Australian government was briefed prior to this time. As a matter of policy the Attorney General is not advised of operational decisions prior to the resolution of the operation. (6) (a) The AFP Practical Guide on International Police to Police Assistance in Death Penalty Charge Situations was formulated in 1993. This document was tabled on 24 May 2005 during the Senate Legal and Constitutional, Estimates hearings. (b) To date no amendments have been made to The AFP Practical Guide on International Police to Police Assistance in Death Penalty Charge Situations. (c) No. (d) AFP Policies and guidelines are regularly reviewed to ensure they adhere to Government policies and international conventions. (7) Mutual assistance is governed by the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 1987. Under section 8 of the Act, where a foreign country requests assistance to investigate an offence which carries the death penalty, the Attorney-General or the Minister for Justice and Customs has a discre- tion to refuse to provide the assistance. Where a foreign country requests assistance where a person has been charged with, or convicted of, an offence which carries the death penalty, the Attorney-General or the Minister for Justice and Customs must refuse to provide the assistance unless there are special circumstances. Special circumstances include where the evidence would assist the defence, or where the foreign country un- dertakes not to impose or carry out the death penalty. Mr Dragan Vasiljkovic (Question No. 1228) Senator Ludwig ask the Minister for Justice and Customs, upon notice, on 15 September 2005: (1) When did the Australian Federal Police (AFP) receive a formal request from the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) for an investigation of Mr Dragan Vasiljkovic. (2) (a) When did the AFP begin the investigation of Mr Vasiljkovic as to whether he committed any crimes in flying to Serbia to engage in the Balkan War. (3) When did the AFP make the decision to begin the investigation. (4) Why was the decision made to begin an investigation after the AFP indicated it would not investigate the matter without a formal request from the ICTY. (5) Has the investigation concluded; if so: (a) what was the outcome; and (b) what offences were considered by the investigators. Senator Ellison—The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 174 SENATE Wednesday, 30 November 2005

(1) The AFP has not received a formal request from the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) for an investigation of Mr Dragan Vasiljkovic. The AFP has made enquiries with overseas authorities in relation to Mr Vasiljkovic. These inquiries are ongoing. (2) See the answer to question one. The AFP has not commenced an investigation of Mr Vasiljkovic. (3) See the answer to question two. (4) See the answer to question two. (5) See the answer to question two.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE