|
senate vote 2022-10-27#6
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2023-01-06 14:18:49
|
Title
Committees — Selection of Bills Committee; Report- Committees - Selection of Bills Committee; Report - Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022
Description
<p class="speaker">Anne Urquhart</p><p>I present the sixth report of 2022 of the Selection of Bills Committee, and I seek leave to have the report incorporated in <i>Hansard</i>.</p>-
- The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2022-10-27.99.1) to the [original motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2022-10-27.89.2), which means it failed. The amendment was introduced by ACT Senator [David Pocock](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2022-10-27.89.2) (Independent).
- ### Amendment text
- > *At the end of the motion, add:*
- >
- > *"and, in respect of the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022, the provisions of the bill be referred immediately to the Education and Employment Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by the first day of the second sitting week in 2023"*
<p>Leave granted.</p><p class="italic"> <i>The report read as follows—</i></p><p class="italic">SELECTI ON OF BILLS COMMITTEE</p><p class="italic">REPORT NO. 6 OF 2022</p><p class="italic"> <i>27 October 2022</i></p><p class="italic">MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE</p><p class="italic">Senator Anne Urquhart (Government Whip, Chair)</p><p class="italic">Senator Wendy Askew (Opposition Whip)</p><p class="italic">Senator Ross Cadell (The Nationals Whip)</p><p class="italic">Senator Pauline Hanson (Pauline Hanson's One Nation Whip)</p><p class="italic">Senator Nick McKim (Australian Greens Whip)</p><p class="italic">Senator Ralph Babet</p><p class="italic">Senator the Hon. Anthony Chisholm</p><p class="italic">Senator the Hon. Katy Gallagher</p><p class="italic">Senator Matt O'Sullivan</p><p class="italic">Senator David Pocock</p><p class="italic">Senator Paul Scarr</p><p class="italic">Senator Tammy Tyrrell</p><p class="italic">Secretary: Tim Bryant 02 6277 3020</p><p class="italic">SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE</p><p class="italic">REPORT NO. 6 OF 2022</p><p class="italic">1. The committee met in private session on Wednesday, 26 October 2022 at 7.21 pm.</p><p class="italic">2. The committee recommends that—</p><p class="italic">the Environment and Other Legislation Amendment (Removing Nuclear Energy Prohibitions) Bill 2022 be <i>referred immediately </i>to the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 31 March 2023 (see appendix 1 for a statement of reasons for referral).</p><p class="italic">3. The committee recommends that the following bills <i>not </i>be referred to committees:</p><ul></ul><p class="italic">4. The committee deferred consideration of the following bills to its next meeting:</p><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><ul></ul><p class="italic">5. The committee considered the following bills but was unable to reach agreement:</p><ul></ul><ul></ul><p class="italic">(Anne Urquhart)</p><p class="italic">Chair</p><p class="italic">27 October 2022</p><p class="italic">Appendix 1</p><p class="italic">Name of Bill:</p><p>Environment and Other Legislation (Removing Nuclear Energy Prohibitions) Bill 2022</p><p>Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:</p><p>Complicated issue.</p><p>Possible submissions or evidence from:</p><p>Various Stakeholders</p><p>Committee to which bill is to be referred:</p><p>Environment and Communications Legislation Committee</p><p>Possible hearing date(s):</p><p>Nov —March</p><p>Possible reporting date:</p><p>31 March 2023</p><p>(signed)</p><p>Wendy Askew</p><p>I move:</p><p class="italic">That the report be adopted.</p> <p class="speaker">Anthony Chisholm</p><p>I move the following amendment:</p><p class="italic">At the end of the motion, add: ", and:</p><p class="italic">(a) in respect of the Offshore Electricity Infrastructure Legislation Amendment Bill 2022, the provisions of the bill be referred immediately to the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 17 November 2022; and</p><p class="italic">(b) in respect of the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022, the provisions of the bill be referred immediately to the Education and Employment Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 17 November 2022".</p> <p class="speaker">Nick McKim</p><p>I indicate that the Greens will be supporting the government's amendments to the Selection of Bills Committee report, and I flag that we will also be moving an amendment, once these amendments have been tabled.</p> <p class="speaker">Anne Ruston</p><p>Equally, I flag that we will also be moving an amendment. I move an amendment that will amend the amendment that has been moved by Senator Chisolm in respect to part (b) of the motion:</p><p class="italic">At the end of the motion, add:</p><p class="italic">in respect of the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022, the provisions of the bill be referred immediately to the Education and Employment Legislation Committee for inquiry and report on 10 February 2023"</p><p>My change reflects a change of committee—the Education and Employment Legislation Committee—for a reporting date of 10 February 2023, as per the amendment circulated.</p> <p class="speaker">Penny Wong</p><p>I rise to speak in support of the government's amendment but also to respond to the amendments just flagged by the opposition. If you ever wanted to see that the Liberal Party and National Party were wedded to low wages as a design feature of the Australian economy, you see that again in this. They don't even want to deal with a bill that, at its heart, recognises that we've got to get wages moving again in this country. But do they want to debate the bill? No, they want to defer the Senate consideration of legislation which is all about trying to get wages moving again. You are so wedded to low wages as a design feature of the economy that you're even trying to defer legislation which this government clearly has a mandate for. We are very happy to have a proper inquiry, but let us be clear. We know what a 1 March date means in terms of legislation—</p> <p class="speaker">Honourable Senator</p><p>An honourable senator interjecting—</p> <p class="speaker">Penny Wong</p><p>Sorry, a 10 February date—we know you want to defer it until next year. I think anybody in this country who remembers Senator Cormann's declaration that low wages are a design feature of the Australian economy knows that that was the policy under the coalition government. Here today, yet again, we see how slavishly they are wedded to that proposition, in wanting to defer a bill for which this government has a very clear mandate—it's not as if this wasn't clearly discussed in the election—and which is needed for our economy, particularly for low-paid men and women throughout this country who are battling inflation and battling rising costs of living at a time when they have experienced wage stagnation for years under those opposite. So, when the opposition come in here and ask questions about the cost of living, let everybody remember what they are trying to defer is changes to our industrial relations system which have, at their core, a desire to get wages moving again. So I would say to the Senate: don't give them that. They have to learn that people in this country, workers in this country not only want but are entitled to a better deal than they had under Scott Morrison and the coalition.</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>Before I call Senator Birmingham, I remind all senators it is particularly disorderly to call out when you are not in your correct seat.</p> <p class="speaker">Simon Birmingham</p><p>The government's proposal for the inquiry into this legislation is for an obscenely short inquiry, obscenely rushed, and shows that this Labor government are scared of any fair dinkum scrutiny into their industrial relations proposals. They have just released this bill today, and they are seeking to push it through the Senate inquiry process in a matter of weeks. If you look at the Senate sitting calendar, when you look at estimates and other considerations, they're only effectively allowing three or four working days for any potential hearings to take place. We know they won't of course use those days; there'd be the last few days before the committee reports. So what opportunity will Australian small businesses have to get their heads around the legislative proposals of this government? What opportunity will they have to take time out of their businesses and make a submission? What opportunity will they have to appear before an inquiry and put their views and concerns about this legislation? The answer to that is: bugger all! They will have bugger all opportunity in terms of giving fair dinkum evidence, analysis and advice to the Senate about this legislation.</p><p>The government are clearly scared of scrutiny around these reforms. They're scared of allowing proper, reasonable scrutiny. If the government's reporting date is adopted by the Senate, this will be one of the shortest, most rushed processes for industrial relations reform in living memory. This will be rushed through faster and quicker than any comparable reforms we have seen, with less scrutiny, less time for senators and, most importantly, less time for Australian businesses.</p><p>Why does this matter? Because these types of reforms will matter about whether we have an economy where businesses have more confidence or less confidence to employ Australians. We already know from the hapless budget handed down by this government earlier this week that unemployment in Australia is forecast to go up under Labor. We already know there are forecast to be more Australians losing their jobs over the next year under this government. Reforms such as this run the risk of worsening that problem. They run the risk that if they get it wrong—as it appears, from the concerns of many parts of business, they might—we will have a situation where Australian businesses, particularly small businesses, will be even more hesitant to employ more Australians. If businesses are concerned about employing Australians, that means fewer Australians in work, more Australians on unemployment benefits and fewer Australians with the opportunity to get ahead. Lord knows they need every helping hand they can get in terms of work opportunities to get ahead at present. With the inflationary environment, with this government's broken promises in relation to energy prices, with this government's threat hanging over the heads of Australian workers in terms of increased taxes in the future, Australians need all the help they can get to get secure work and have certainty but to do it in an environment where those jobs exist. They only exist if businesses and small businesses are hiring.</p><p>The government claims these reforms in this bill were largely cooked up at its jobs summit, but we know that small businesses were largely absent from the jobs summit.</p> <p class="speaker">Matt O'Sullivan</p><p>Plenty of union people!</p> <p class="speaker">Simon Birmingham</p><p>Indeed, Senator O'Sullivan—plenty of union representatives at the jobs summit. We know from all the evidence that Mr Burke and others sit down with the unions quite frequently. They have been there at the drafting table, no doubt, day in and day out, preparing this legislation.</p><p>But this is not a debate about the substance of the legislation; this is a debate about whether or not proper process is followed, and those opposite don't want to follow the established processes. This is a highly unusual process they're proposing to rush through the inquiry in an abnormally short period of time. The opposition's amendment simply ensures we have a normal period of time, and then the government can bring the legislation forward for normal debate in the early part of next year as would be customary, not seek to ram it through as they are proposing. I urge the crossbench in particular to support the opposition's amendment to ensure— <i>(Time expired)</i></p> <p class="speaker">David Pocock</p><p>The Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022 is clearly really important legislation for Australians, particularly workers in areas such as nursing, frontline workers who have not seen wage increases and who are feeling the pinch when it comes to inflation and the cost of living, with electricity prices forecast to go up more. This is really important for us to consider as a Senate. I am very supportive of a number of the measures in this enormous piece of legislation. However, I think it's really important that the Senate has time to consider this, as good as the ideas in the legislation are.</p><p>To be clear, I've not seen the legislation. The crossbench has had no opportunity to see it in detail. Those who have had an opportunity to see the legislation have signed nondisclosure agreements. This is brand-new legislation, with a reporting date of a few weeks. It doesn't make sense to me to give crossbench senators a couple of weeks to get across this and to give small business owners who are under the pump a short period of time to do so. Elements of this bill would have huge consequences for our industrial relations laws in Australia. I asked the Parliamentary Library to look at the length of reporting dates for industrial relations reform in Australia, all the way back to Work Choices in 2005 and this sort of reporting date is unprecedented in terms of industrial relations. So I have real concerns about having such a short reporting date.</p><p>I have put to the government that I believe there are parts of this big omnibus bill that potentially don't need as long to consider—parts of it around putting gender equity into the Fair Work Act, equal renumeration, the two new expert panels, banning pay secrecy clauses, and the BOOT reforms, which people have known about; there seems to be general consensus. But other elements of the bill are new to many and I think warrant our consideration.</p><p>I have circulated an amendment that would allow us to have more time, but I'm certainly open to talking to the government about ensuring that we deal with this legislation in a timely way but also allow the oversight that these committee hearings provide. Being new to this place and having been involved in the committee process for a few bills now, I find quite incredible the access to experts and the ideas that come up, and the genuine consultation, as well as the very collegiate way senators engage to improve legislation.</p><p>Given that we haven't seen any details of this bill, given how big it is and, crucially, how important this is to Australians and the future of workers and small businesses in Australia, I would really like the government to ensure that we get the balance right between legislating in a timely manner and having time to really look at the detail, to engage with the various stakeholders and, ultimately, to legislate very important reforms that are needed, that are warranted when wages for many Australians are back at 2008 levels.</p> <p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>-
-
|