STATUTES AMENDMENT (NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS SYSTEM) BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 9 September 2009. Page 3783.)

The Hon. I.F. EVANS (Davenport) (17:03): I indicate that I am the lead speaker on this matter. The minister will know that this debate will not take as long as the last one. This is the Statutes Amendment (National Industrial Relations System) Bill 2009, the second bill of the package that tries to establish a national industrial relations system. It deals with some transitional and consequential amendments to state laws. The bill provides for transitional arrangements for those employers and employees referring back to the state system and consequential changes to state law, and it updates the South Australian laws to reflect reference to recent changes to some commonwealth law. The bill provides for recognition under the state act for all agreements for local government made under the federal act. This will include federal awards and agreements.

The government argues that, to remove doubt, the bill also recognises all agreements by local government made in the state system from the 2006 to 2009 period inclusive. These two provisions apparently cover councils which went to the federal system and should not have or, indeed, stayed in the state system and should not have. Unregistered agreements and MOUs are not recognised in the bill, but the transitional provisions will allow scope for the parties to legitimise these arrangements. The Industrial Relations Commission will have the power to resolve differences in the transitional arrangements. They will also be able to vary or revoke on application any term of provision of a transitioning award or enterprise bargaining provision. The government says that it was the approach used in 2006 when dealing with certain aspects of the public sector transition into the state scheme.

All agreements transitioning into the state jurisdiction from 1 January 2010 will operate subject to minimum standards in the state Fair Work Act 1994. They will have a sunset clause in two years or the normal life of the agreement, whichever comes first. At this time, they must be renegotiated. Federal awards relevant to local government will be recognised under the state law by regulation from 1 January 2010. The legislation also deals with the bargaining process that is in progress at the time of the transition. If not approved by Fair Work Australia by 31 December 2009, it will be concluded by the state commission.

With regard to the public sector, most government business enterprises will be covered by the state industrial relations system. There will be dual appointments to the federal and state commissions. Lucky for those people who can get it, and I suspect I know who they might be. The state Industrial Relations Court will be an eligible court under the federal system as well. The bill re-establishes the discretionary approach to the awarding of costs apparently.

The government continues its attack on the Exclusive Brethren and the Exclusive Brethren lose the restriction on right of entry of unions in the state act as that provision does not apply in the federal act. It is unfortunate that the government did not consult the Exclusive Brethren at all about their particular provision. I spoke to them this morning and they confirm that they have not been consulted on this matter. Regardless of your view of an organisation, if you are going to take away their right, then you would think a common courtesy would be to at least consult with them.

I do not have many questions on this bill. I have no need to go into committee, unless the government has amendments to this one as well. No?

The Hon. P. Caica interjecting:

The Hon. I.F. EVANS: You do; okay. The minister in his reply might want to explain why they have taken a decision that agreements transitioning in the state jurisdiction as of 1 January 2010 will operate subject to the minimum standards of the state Fair Work Act, but they will have a sunset clause of two years or the normal life of the agreement, whichever is the earlier. I am wondering why the government will not let those agreements run their normal course; why they are forcing them to renegotiate at the end of two years? I am not sure why they want to put people through that pain, but that is what the government has decided to do.

During the briefing I asked the minister what cost saving there was to the taxpayer as a result of this package. The minister's advice to me at the time was that he had not calculated the cost saving, even though cabinet had signed off on the legislation. It was introduced into the parliament but the government had not yet established the cost saving. Will the minister inform the house of the cost saving to the taxpayer per year of the total package? If the minister answers those two questions, I do not need to go into committee.

The Hon. P. CAICA (Colton—Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development) (17:08): I will conclude the debate and, in so doing, attempt to answer satisfactorily the questions of the shadow spokesperson. I have some amendments to move, so we will need to go into committee. Hopefully, we will do it quickly. I will be relatively brief in summing up this bill as many issues were canvassed in my response to the Fair Work (Commonwealth Powers) Bill 2009, the referral bill on which the house recently concluded debate.

I record my thanks for the contributions that have been made on this bill and the previous bill. I emphasise the necessity for parliament to expeditiously consider this important bill. The government appreciates more than anything else the level of cooperation from both the business sector and the union sector in the consultation process with respect to the ongoing development of this bill and the transitional arrangements as they relate to the subsequent agreement that was struck with the commonwealth. It has been a fine example of many sectors that are stakeholders within the industrial relations system working well together.

In closing, my remarks will update members about further constructive developments that have occurred since the bill was introduced last month. I will not repeat this information in view of the urgency associated with the passage of the bills. This parliament's timely consideration of these bills will enable the commonwealth parliament to debate the acceptance of the referral of industrial relations powers. I am advised that the commonwealth minister will introduce a bill to accept our referral and make technical and other necessary changes to the Fair Work Act 2009 in the week commencing 19 October 2009. The commonwealth bill will also provide for transitional arrangements for employers and employees who are currently under the South Australian IR system to move to the federal jurisdiction.

With respect to the question asked by the member for Davenport, there will be that two year preservation because it will not be the job of this bill to change the working conditions that are the subject of an agreement. Terms and conditions of employment encompassed within an agreement will continue to exist for the life of that particular agreement or the two year period, whichever comes first, in order to ensure certainty with respect to the employment conditions for those people who will be transitioning from one jurisdiction to the other.

The Deputy Prime Minister (Hon. Julia Gillard) has confirmed that, amongst the changes to the commonwealth legislation, there will be certain amendments that reflect our intended participation in the national system as a partner; and I reinforce the point 'as a partner'. In particular, I advise the house that the commonwealth laws will recognise that the South Australian minister will be given standing to make representations to Fair Work Australia in the public interest.

The legislation will also be amended to encourage the heads of Fair Work Australia and our state commission to work together for the effective utilisation of the dual appointees shared by the two tribunals. Further, the role of the Industrial Relations Court was highlighted as an eligible court for the national system. Matters will be enhanced by permitting appeals from decisions of magistrates on such matters to be heard by a judge of the court rather than immediate appeal only to the Federal Court. All these changes have been sought by this government and supported by local stakeholders in order to contribute to a genuine and effective national system.

I also take this opportunity to expand on the explanation I provided in my second reading explanation about the ongoing role of the Industrial Relations Commission of South Australia and Fair Work Australia in completing collective bargaining processes for the local government sector that is returning to the state IR system on 1 January 2010. Where a bargaining process was commenced in the federal system and not approved by Fair Work Australia by 31 December 2009, in my initial remarks I advised that the state commission would conclude the approval process in the state system. While clause 5 of Schedule 1 of this bill empowers the state commission to complete the approval process for incomplete bargaining agreements in some circumstances, it is appropriate that I also draw members' attention to clause 4 of this schedule which provides an efficient mechanism for Fair Work Australia to complete the approval process under certain conditions.

Members will appreciate the ongoing consultation being held with other governments and local stakeholders around establishing a single national IR system for the private sector. I foreshadow at this point a number of minor amendments that the government will move during the committee stage of the bill. They relate, first, to clause 8(6) to include individual transitional employment agreements (ITEAs), along with Australian Workplace Agreements (AWAs) as federal instruments not given continuing effect under the South Australian Fair Work Act 1994. I will canvass the reason for this approach.

We will also move an amendment to remove the declaration of SA Water as a non-national system employer. I will provide further information on that matter, should the opposition spokesperson require it. In order to provide further certainty or coverage for local government corporations and to permit further time for us to consult with that sector on the entities to be excluded, the government intends to amend the bill to enable those entities to be confirmed by regulation.

The honourable member made his point earlier, and I presume he speaks on behalf of the opposition, knowing full well that a comment was made earlier about anomalies that might exist on both sides of the house. I hope the opposition will support these historic bills which will go a long way towards finally bringing about a single national IR system for the private sector in this country.

I appreciate the cooperation we have received from both employers and employee associations in South Australia with respect to reaching this position. Quite frankly, we would not be where we are today if it was not for their collective cooperation.

In concluding, I also thank parliamentary counsel, in particular Richard Dennis, for the outstanding work he has done that has been recognised not only in this state but also at the commonwealth level with respect to the work that needs to be done in relation to its bill. Also, I thank the staff of SafeWork SA, in particular, Mr Peter Hampton and Miss Marie Boland, for the outstanding work they have done; along with the members of my office staff who have worked very diligently towards this result.

I will answer the second question that was raised that related specifically to the costs involved. Participating in the national system will not result in any extra costs to the South Australian taxpayer. Specifically, there are no additional costs to the public sector arising from participation in the national system. On the contrary, there are, potentially, significant cost savings over time associated with South Australia's participation in the national system, with the state government no longer being required to fully finance certain elements of a state industrial relations infrastructure to support the regulation of private sector employers.

Through cooperative arrangements, the commonwealth will fund the provision of supplementary inspectorate, education and compliance services within the national system, using the resources of SafeWork SA. These resources, of course, are still required because of the continuation of certain state legislation, as we have mentioned, including occupational health and safety, outworkers, shop trading hours and public holidays; and the need to administer those and other state laws.

Specifically, there will be cost savings or additional income to South Australia associated with: reducing SafeWork SA's appropriation funding for IR staffing; contributions from the commonwealth to assist with local service delivery of education enforcement services by SafeWork SA under contract of the fair work ombudsman for compliance and related services and transitional education visits; contributions from the commonwealth to assist with the operation of the Industrial Relations Commission of SA; and maintaining an already downsized commission.

The full details of the net financial benefits to South Australia are currently being assessed and, regrettably, I cannot give a definitive answer at this point in time. It is safe to say that, from our perspective, we have entered into what would be, on any fair assessment, an acceptable arrangement.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

In committee.

Clauses 1 to 29 passed.

Clause 30.

The Hon. P. CAICA: I move:

Page 12, line 11 [clause 30, inserted Schedule 2, clause 1]—Delete 'or a pre-reform AWA' and substitute:

, a pre-reform AWA or an Individual Transitional Employment Agreement

Page 14, line 12 [clause 30, inserted Schedule 2A, clause 1]—Delete 'or a pre-reform AWA' and substitute:

, a pre-reform AWA or an Individual Transitional Employment Agreement

Amendments carried; clause as amended passed.

Clause 31 passed.

Clause 32.

The Hon. P. CAICA: I move:

Page 17, line 26 [clause 32, inserted section 302A(1)]—After 'local government sector employer' insert:

brought within the ambit of this subsection by the regulations (either by being specifically prescribed or by being a member of a prescribed class)

I can provide explanations, but it appears we have some agreement on these amendments.

Amendment carried; clause as amended passed.

Clauses 33 to 41 passed.

Clause 42.

The Hon. P. CAICA: I move:

Page 20, lines 17 to 22—Delete clause 42

Amendment carried; clause as amended passed.

Remaining clauses (43 to 48) passed, schedule and title passed.

Bill reported with amendments.

Third Reading

The Hon. P. CAICA (Colton—Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development) (17:21): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

The Hon. I.F. EVANS (Davenport) (17:21): I take the opportunity to thank the minister's staff for their briefings, and parliamentary counsel for their work. It is a highly technical bill, so it was good to have their input. I thank those officers of SafeWork SA who had input; and, to those officers who might find themselves in federal roles in the future, I wish them all the best in their new career.

Bill read a third time and passed.