Bills

Labour Hire Licensing Repeal Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 28 November 2018.)

The Hon. T.J. WHETSTONE (Chaffey—Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development) (17:04): I rise today to support the Labour Hire Licensing Repeal Bill 2018. The former Labor government introduced the Labour Hire Licensing Repeal Bill in August 2017, following an investigation airing on an ABC Four Corners program, and it was passed through the Legislative Council with amendments on 28 November 2017.

Since the act was formally commenced and became law on 12 December 2017, significant issues relating to the scope and application of the legislation have become apparent. Some of the most significant impacts of this bill are on horticultural businesses, particularly growers who employ fruit pickers. Many of our farming businesses rely on labour hire services as a vital tool to manage their workforce needs, particularly during peak times of harvest. This licensing regime added uncertainty, administration and costs for businesses in our agriculture, food and wine industries. The citrus and wine industry have expressed to me their concerns with the licensing scheme and their support for repealing the act.

A number of small business owners have expressed concerns to Consumer and Business Services relating to the pressure they have received from big businesses with whom they currently have business arrangements on the basis that they will not continue to be engaged unless they obtain a labour hire licence. In some cases, this is irrespective of whether or not the business arrangement is strictly captured by the licensing scheme but, instead, because some business operators are taking an overly cautious approach due to the ambiguity surrounding the scope of the scheme in order to safeguard themselves against potentially offending against the act.

Prior to the state election, we committed to repealing the Labour Hire Act, and we are fulfilling that commitment. The Attorney-General has contacted over 700 industry groups and relevant industries to inform them of the intention to repeal the Labour Hire Licensing Act 2017. As the Attorney-General has said, 'The labour hire laws were established on ideology and they will be repealed on common sense.' Feedback from the industry during the consultation process on the repeal of this act included concern from industry that the labour hire licensing scheme did not target high-risk industries, but instead added red tape and burdened businesses already doing the right thing.

What has been clear in the overall process is that when rushing this bill through the house Labor did not listen to what industry was saying and the arguments made at the time for significant amendments to the legislation. The feedback I received from industry labelled this piece of legislation as 'a draconian act'. Industries such as wine and citrus rely heavily on employment contractors to pick and prune. They saw this legislation as completely unnecessary and a burden on them being held responsible for someone else's action outside their control.

The citrus industry was also concerned that these changes did not line up with the Fair Work award at the national level. Another example of this bill being rushed through was feedback from the citrus industry that suggested they were not consulted on the proposed changes and were concerned that their pickers, who can have low levels of English in both language and literacy, would not be able to understand the changes straight from a website, creating even greater uncertainty and greater issues.

When the government announced their intention to repeal this legislation, Business SA said that the laws targeted businesses that were doing the right thing, rather than seeking out the bad, and in fact does not focus on the industries that have raised concerns about current labour hire practice such as those in horticulture. We end up with a situation where the innocent are punished for the very few who are doing the wrong thing.

To be clear, anyone who exploits someone in the workplace should be investigated and prosecuted accordingly. However, this regulatory regime was going to capture much more than was expected. I am advised that Consumer and Business Services have received 119 applications for a labour hire licence since the act passed but have determined, due to the ambiguity of the legislation, not to grant any of the applications.

Should the act be repealed, the labour hire task force that has already been established will continue to operate utilising existing legislative provisions to effectively address and prosecute unscrupulous labour hire providers here in South Australia. The task force has already met on a number of occasions and has developed a task force compliance strategy to enable cross-agency collaboration and the identification of high-risk labour hire providers.

If the legislation is repealed, the commissioner will refund all application fees that have been received to date. However, this does not include any other expenses associated with the licence application. The CBS will be the agency responsible for communicating this to the relevant stakeholders and those who lodged application for the licence under that scheme.

A small number of application fees have already been refunded to applicants upon their request, and the South Australian Wine Industry Association, the membership of which represents approximately 96 per cent of the grapes crushed in South Australia and about 36 per cent of the land under viticulture, fully supports the Labour Hire Licensing Repeal Bill 2018.

The South Australian Wine Industry Association (SAWIA) was concerned about the lack of genuine consultation on Labor's bill when it was first proposed, and points out that, when the Labour Hire Licensing Bill 2017 was before parliament, the former government had to introduce more than 30 amendments to attempt to resolve a number of serious issues that were brought to their attention by industry, including SAWIA. The concerns raised by SAWIA about Labor's current bill include:

ambiguous coverage;

excessive and disproportionate penalties;

excessive, unfair, impractical and anticompetitive requirements for registration; and

excessive and impractical reporting and information requirements.

Since the commencement of the act, SAWIA advised that it has received a large number of emails and phone calls from wineries, grape growers, vineyard contractors and labour hire providers across South Australia expressing alarm over the impact the act will have on business and compliance cost, access to labour and the uncertainty and confusion regarding its coverage.

Labour hire is a legitimate form of employment and means to supplement labour requirements on a temporary basis. Labour hire is one of many sources relied on by the South Australian wine industry to meet temporary labour demands. There is a genuine fear in the wine industry that, due to the heavy compliance burden under the act, labour hire providers will exit the market thereby putting even greater pressure on regional employers, including wineries and wine grape growers in my electorate to try to source labour during peak operational periods.

There are approximately 70 wine producers and 20,300 hectares of wine grape plantings within the Chaffey electorate. We should not be placing greater burden on these producers, and that is why it is important the parliament supports the repeal bill.

I also received correspondence on the bill from a peak South Australian citrus body, CASAR. There are more than 400 citrus growers in South Australia with 6,300 hectares and 2.5 million trees under cultivation; so, a significant employer with about 5,000 full-time and seasonal workers annually. Initially, the former Labor government proposed to bring the labour hire bill during the citrus industry's busiest period, and, without any consultation with the industry, contractors were unaware of these changes. This just shows how ad hoc and rushed the original bill was. I commend the repeal bill to the house.

Ms COOK (Hurtle Vale) (17:13): I am really pleased to be able to rise and actually oppose this labour hire repeal bill. In office, Labor could see the writing on the wall regarding the labour hire practices and the effects they were having on our—

The Hon. D.G. Pisoni interjecting:

Ms COOK: Do you know what? We sat here—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Ms COOK: —and we listened to the rubbish coming out of the mouth—

The Hon. D.G. Pisoni interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Member for Hurtle Vale has the call. The member does not need to respond to interjections. She will also be heard in silence. The member for Hurtle Vale has the call.

Ms COOK: Thank you very much. I am rising to speak on this ideological thought bubble that is the Labour Hire Licensing Repeal Bill. For those who may not know, labour hire is the facility of both skilled and unskilled labour for varying lengths of times to prospective employers. It is most utilised in the community for the recruitment of staff for non-ongoing positions; short-term contracts; and casual, typically blue collar, workers.

What separates labour hire from traditional direct employment is the pay and charge rates, the pay rate being the rate paid to the employee on a per hour basis and the charge rate levied against the client to whom the labour hire organisation provided the suitable employee.

As I said, in office, we could see the writing on the wall. We understood the practices that were happening out in the market and the effect that they were having on our jobs, so we took strong action. We understood the dignity of the work that is being done by people in our community. We understood the dramatic shift in the South Australian workforce, as our economy continued to transition into new and exciting industries. We put safeguards in place to protect the most vulnerable from being taken advantage of. These are protections that the Premier would now like to strip away.

While labour hire serves a role in our community by helping to facilitate workers to appropriate roles and positions, the checks and balances currently in place via the Labour Hire Licensing Act 2017 are critical in protecting the wages and conditions of South Australians employed through labour hire. This is most important for unskilled workers or young South Australians entering the workforce for the very first time, often through labour hire. It is these people—South Australians who might not have the necessary experience or confidence to stand up for their rights at work—who must be protected from these unsavoury practices that were festering in the sector before the implementation of the Labour Hire Licensing Act.

Sadly, we already know this government is a bad one. We have seen many examples over the past 12 months of the Premier and his government putting their own interests and ideology before vulnerable people in our community. We have seen it with the budget last year that jacked up the rents on Housing Trust houses, committed to the closure of Service SA centres and committed to privatising our health and incarceration services and facilities.

Members interjecting:

Ms COOK: We saw this with the—

Mr PEDERICK: Point of order: the leader is interjecting from out of his seat.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: As are a number of others from both sides of the chamber. I ask—

Mr PEDERICK: I want to pick him up. I'm not picking on mine.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Hammond. Your point of order is noted. It is usual practice for the member contributing to the debate to be heard in silence, so that will continue. You have the call.

Ms COOK: I am happy to help with the member for Hammond's hemianopia if he cannot see to that side of the chamber. Privatisation of our health and incarceration services has been committed to. We have seen it with the $46 million cuts committed to public transport across our state, which will make it harder for thousands of South Australians to get to school, work, the shops and also medical appointments. Indeed, the member for Hammond might struggle for his eye check. What we have before the house today is the true nub—

An honourable member interjecting:

Ms COOK: That is what the hemianopia is about. What we have before the house today is the true nub of what the Marshall government is really about, what a Liberal government is really about, and that is the weakening and destruction of the labour hire laws: a decision that will cost South Australian jobs, damage South Australian businesses and lead to poorer safety outcomes and conditions in our workplace. Never mind that repealing the Labour Hire Licensing Act will hurt job security and job safety for thousands of South Australians who only want to get to work and back home to their families knowing they will earn a decent wage and be protected and safe while doing so.

South Australia, under the former Weatherill Labor government, was one of only three states, together with Victoria and Queensland, that acted to pass legislation to regulate and license labour hire companies. Repealing this act does nothing but give a leg-up to Liberal Party donors and supporters by allowing labour hire firms to operate with impunity, with very little protections and securities in place for South Australians looking for work.

Of course, should this repeal succeed, we can expect a race to the bottom when it comes to wages and conditions, with the Liberal Party setting the standard. Labour hire companies can offer less and expect more because they know the demand for work is so great. This of course will spill over into non-labour hire related employment, as industries are disrupted by firms offering cutthroat contracts, wages and conditions. We will also likely see an increase in imported workers at the expense of South Australian jobs. We know Premier Marshall is committed to ripping up the working conditions of South Australians because he is joined—

The Hon. S.K. KNOLL: Point of order: I ask the member to refer to members by their title, please.

Ms COOK: Thank you.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Hurtle Vale, I uphold the point of order. We are not being unnecessarily pedantic. It is customary for us to refer to each other by our official titles.

Ms COOK: We know that the Premier is committed to ripping up the working conditions of South Australians—thank you for allowing me to repeat that—because he is joined at the hip to big business interests and lobbyists. But we also know that the Premier takes his marching orders from the big banks and his Canberra overlords. He has clearly been brushing up on his understanding of WorkChoices before pursuing the repeal—

Mr Pederick interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for Hammond is called to order. Member for Hurtle Vale, continue. You have the call.

Ms COOK: I think I have to go back. I think I have lost my spot. We know that the Premier is committed to ripping up the working conditions of South Australians because he is joined at the hip to big business interests and lobbyists. We also know that the Premier takes his marching orders from the big banks and his Canberra overlords. He has clearly been brushing up on his understanding of WorkChoices before pursuing the repeal of the Labour Hire Licensing Act in South Australia—what a disgrace!