House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2) 51 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Grievance Debate WorkChoices WORKCHOICES Ms CICCARELLO House of Assembly Norwood Ms CICCARELLO (Norwood) (15:32): Today I rise to talk about an issue that resonates with many of my constituents and, in fact, many people around Australia, and that is industrial relations. In a few days when working Australians go to the ballot box to decide the future of this country, they will have a clear choice. They can either support the Howard government's extreme and unfair workplace laws that have stripped away the working conditions of Australian families or they can endorse federal Labor's policy of abolishing these laws and replacing them with a system based on balance, flexibility and fairness. In my opinion, there is no choice. I am confident that the 17,000 residents of my electorate who are employed in some capacity and who have taken a hard look at the facts will make the right decision for themselves and their families—a decision that is not based on rhetoric or election-driven spin but cold, hard, undeniable facts. Fact 1: Before the last election Mr Howard did not tell the Australian people about his plan to introduce his WorkChoices legislation. I have a pretty good idea why not, and there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that the Howard government will push even further ahead with its extreme IR agenda if it is re-elected. It is a great pity that Channel 7 lost its bid yesterday to compel the government to reveal its plans for further reform. But with or without the secret documents, I think the government's agenda can best be summed up by finance minister Senator Nick Minchin, who only last year said: There is much to do...this is a revolution...there is still a long way to go...awards, the IR Commission, all the rest of it. Fact 2: The Howard government's own survey, which was leaked earlier this year, showed the following alarming results with respect to its WorkChoices legislation. It cut: all protected award conditions, including overtime, shift loading and public holidays in 44 per cent of AWAs; shift loading from 75 per cent of AWAs; incentive payments and bonuses from 70 per cent of AWAs; penalty rates from 68 per cent of AWAs; monetary allowances from 57 per cent of AWAs; annual leave loading from 59 per cent of AWAs; and declared public holidays from 22 per cent of AWAs. The Howard government acknowledges and even brags about how it has stripped away the rights of workers. Last week, we all saw senior government minister Tony Abbott publicly admit that workers were worse off under WorkChoices. Out of his own mouth came the following statement: I accept that certain protections, in inverted commas, are not what they were. I accept that that has largely gone. I accept that. I accept that the Industrial Relations Commission doesn't have the same power to reach into the nooks and crannies of every business that it used to have. Well, Mr Abbott, you may well accept these things, but hard-working Australians should not, nor should they accept your subsequent statement that the best protection for a worker who feels they are under pressure in their job is just to get another one. Fact 3: the Howard government has wasted $121 million on advertising its WorkChoices legislation. It spent $55 million in launching it and then, following justified public outrage, spent a further $66 million trying to sell to the Australian people its so-called fairness test, a test that is policy on the run, if ever I have seen it, and a complete and utter sham. This so-called fairness test does not guarantee full compensation for lost award conditions. This so-called fairness test does not apply to all award conditions: only to the Howard government's so-called 'protected award conditions', which do not include redundancy provisions, long service leave or rostering protections. As at 31 October this year, 144,885 workplace agreements are still awaiting final assessment by the workplace authority, creating confusion and uncertainty for both employers and employees. I could go on and on, but the real issue here is what needs to be done to fix this diabolical mess, and a Rudd Labor government has the solution. For a start, it will replace these extreme laws and introduce a new system based on flexibility, balance and fairness. It will abolish AWAs. It will ensure employees earning under $100,000 are protected by a strong safety net which includes 10 national employment standards and a further 10 minimum award standards which will protect key entitlements such as public holidays, overtime, penalty rates, annual leave, parental leave and redundancy. It will allow employees earning over $100,000 to negotiate their own common law employment contracts, but subject to the national employment standards. It will create a new independent industrial umpire to oversee the new IR system and bring fairness to Australian workplaces. In short, a federal Labor government will do everything in its power to ensure that the relationship between employees and employers is a happy and productive one. I am confident that the millions of Australian workers who cast their vote on Saturday will recognise that and will be able to look forward to their professional futures with optimism and a renewed sense of security. Time expired.