Take Note of Answers – Workplace Relations – 28 March 2017
Senator REYNOLDS (Western Australia) (15:10): I, too, rise to speak to the motion to take note of the minister’s answers. I could not believe what I was hearing from Senator Gallacher. It was just the same tired old Labor politics of division and left-wing ideology, and it was simply untrue.
On this side of the chamber, we understand that governments do not create jobs; employers do. And this government is standing up for small business people, who want to get ahead and grow jobs and create new jobs. If those opposite actually went out and talked to small businesses in their electorates in their states, they would hear very clearly that small shops, pharmacies, takeaways and small hotels, who have not benefited from the dirty EBA deals that those opposite have done with the big businesses, are suffering. And they want to employ more people. They want to open on Sundays. They want to employ students. They want to employ more women. But they cannot afford to do it. So, if they do open, what do they do? They work seven days a week—they do it themselves, so that they can open their doors and get business, because they simply cannot afford to employ more staff.
Senator Gallacher said, ‘Oh well, the Fair Work Commission!’ and tried to rubbish them. But it was your commission. You on the other side established that. And, just because you do not like the rules that the independent umpire makes, it is no excuse for walking away from what they said.
Let us just remember what Mr Shorten said on accepting the decision of his own umpire that you set up. He was asked:
… the Fair Work Commission will report soon on Sunday penalty rates. They’re an independent body, in fact you had a lot to do with the way they operate now when you were Minister. Will you accept their findings given this is an independent body assessing penalty rates for Sunday, if you’re Prime Minister.
So, given what those opposite are saying now, do you think that Bill Shorten, the Leader of the Opposition, said: ‘I’ve got problems with the Fair Work Commission. I don’t agree with giving my independent umpire the decision’? No, he did not say that at all. What Mr Shorten said was: ‘Yes,’ he would. The interviewer said: ‘You’ll accept them?’ He said: ‘Yes,’ quite clearly—’Yes.’ No ifs; no buts; none of the concerns about the commission that Senator Gallacher was alluding to just now. And the journalist said: ‘Even if they reduce Sunday penalty rates?’ and Mr Shorten said: ‘Well, I said I’d accept the independent tribunal.’
But all of a sudden he does not like the decision of the independent tribunal, so what is happening? Those opposite are now coming out with the same old, tired old rhetoric, trying to find reasons to undermine their own commission. And it is falling on deaf ears. People out in the community are not that simple. Yes, you are stirring up some emotion. But the facts are: the Fair Work Commission took years to come to this decision. They took about 7,000 submissions. They consulted widely. They came out with a very cogent report on this decision. Yet, again, instead of actually dealing with the facts in the Fair Work Commission’s report, those opposite again are just pulling out this tired old 19th- or 20th-century union-warfare sort of language, because they cannot debate the points.
The facts are very clear. If you go and talk to any small business in your state, they will tell you that they want to employ more people. This penalty rate system was set up in the day for very good reasons, when people did work nine to five, Monday to Friday, they did not work Saturdays and Sundays, and they went to church with their families on Sundays. Well, sadly, that is not the case anymore.
Women want more flexibility in the workforce. Men want more flexibility in the workforce. We have got a lot of students. We have got a lot of young people who want their first job and cannot get it, and you are denying them an opportunity.
Who can forget the shameful incident that happened in the other chamber to my friend and colleague Ann Sudmalis?
She is one of the most wonderful local representatives. She has a heart the size of a planet. Where were any of you over there when your members absolutely demonised her for saying that she wanted more young people in her constituency to work with these penalty rates? Where were you when your colleagues made this wonderful woman cry? Shame on you all!