HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2012-03-14 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

BUSINESS SA

The Hon. S.G. WADE (15:53): I rise to speak today about Business SA and my concern for its disregard for the democratic values of this state. Firstly, Business SA has shown a disregard for the democratic institutions of our state in particular. In early 2010 in the lead-up to the state election, Business SA released a Better Democracy manifesto. One of their demands was the abolition of this council. Mr Vaughan said the upper house's power to frustrate a government elected with a policy mandate led to uncertainty in the private sector and stifled investment.

What a bizarre claim! The business community, including Business SA, repeatedly uses the circuit-breaker of the Legislative Council to try to force the government to think again about its policies. It is not hard to think of examples: real estate reform; WorkCover; work, health and safety. If Business SA wants certainty, then it should just take what the government does to them and not come in here asking us to change legislation.

On the basis of Business SA's purported desire for certainty, it is astonishing to read their other recommendation in that manifesto that said that deadlocks between the House of Assembly and the Legislative Council should be resolved by a double dissolution of the parliament and a subsequent election. Business SA is trying to tell us they would prefer to see an election held every time the House of Assembly and the Legislative Council have a disagreement. Don't they think that would lead to more elections and that more elections would lead to more business uncertainty?

Also interesting is their call for four-year terms for legislative councillors while also retaining the 22-seat membership of this place. This would inevitably lead to even more fracturing of the vote through lower electoral quotas, amplifying the democratic pluralism which Business SA wants to abolish. Business SA's zealotry against this council also fails to represent its own membership. Only 36 per cent of its membership indicated that they thought reform of the Legislative Council was necessary.

Business SA, on the one hand, accuses others of not being representative and, on the other, betrays the people it claims to represent. Business SA claims to be the 'voice' of South Australian businesses of 'all sizes'. Yet the actions and advocacy of Business SA indicate that it is primarily concerned with representing the demands of a minority of big businesses in this state. It is in the game of big business doing deals with big unions and big government.

We see Business SA's arrogance in its deal with the SDA to alter shop trading hours, trading more public holidays for deregulation of the labour market. This is a deal that will hurt small businesses the most. In the last few weeks we have seen an outpouring of discontent from the business community. The Australian Hotels Association, the Motor Trade Association, the Shopping Centre Council of Australia, Restaurant and Catering South Australia and the list goes on: all of these groups will be hurt by changes in which they had no say at all, so much so that they have created their own representative voice to oppose the changes, the SA Business Coalition.

Business SA also decries the diversity of our federal system and calls for national uniformity. In an ABC radio interview last Tuesday, Peter Vaughan heavily criticised the diversity of our federation in matters such as regulation, taxes and so on. He ignored the fact that a healthy federal structure is better at dealing with local distinctives and promotes competition and efficiency. One only needs to look at WorkCover levies, for example, to see where competitive pressure between the states helps businesses by helping to keep rates below what they would otherwise be.

In the same ABC interview Mr Vaughan insisted that the group being formed for national consultation on business deregulation by the federal government needs to have 'representatives of states and territories'. Why? If Business SA thinks that state and territory distinctives are so insignificant that national uniformity is utopia, what would representatives of states and territories bring to the table? In fact, if Business SA is so confident about national uniformity, why don't they do us all a favour: disband and let the Canberra business advocates run the show?

National uniformity will be the end of interstate competition, a pressure that sees constant improvement and innovation in businesses around Australia. I urge Business SA to reassess its direction. I hope that Business SA will become more respectful of the democratic institutions of this state. I hope that Business SA will be more respectful of the interests of the range of businesses in South Australia. I hope that Business SA will become more aware of the positive economic contribution of competitive federalism.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT