Mrs JOHNSTON(12.52 p.m.) —The Workplace Relations and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1996 is one of the most significant pieces of legislation to be debated in this House. It signifies a new beginning for the Australian workplace; indeed, it is an opportunity we cannot afford to miss.

This bill marks a substantial change. It recognises that high rates of unemployment and Australia's increasing exposure to international competition mean there is little time to waste in changing the mind-set of Australian workplace culture. This bill will shift the underlying rationale for a system from an increasingly outdated and paternalistic model to one which treats employers and employees as intelligent individuals, capable of determining their own best interests.

The coalition has led the debate for reform in our industrial relations system. Indeed, I congratulate the Prime Minister (Mr Howard), who has championed the need to make major changes so as to enable Australia to become productive, efficient and successful again. The Prime Minister's leadership stands in stark contrast to the leadership of former Prime Ministers Hawke and Keating, who buckled, in my opinion, under the pressure from the ACTU on issues of industrial reform.

This bill will provide Australian workers with new opportunities. They will enjoy greater flexibility, higher living standards and better paid jobs. To achieve this, it is necessary to replace the system inherited from the previous government. This is not because the model that they had does not provide the legal means for reaching enterprise agreements but because the old system treats genuine workplace agreements as a second-best option.

We are breaking with the past here, where people are forced against their own free will to join a union dominated by a few heavies who put their own selfish interests ahead of those whom they are supposed to represent. I suggest that it is time to break from that. Those on the Labor side of politics see adversity and conflict in all relationships between employers and employees. Members opposite would have us believe that all employees are not capable of understanding their own interests or how to best protect them.

Members on the opposite side of this House say they do not see the need for reform. After their 13 years in power, they are blind to the situation which they have left this nation in—around a million people unemployed, many hundreds of thousands more underemployed, ballooning current account deficits and foreign debt, stagnant wages, record high interest rates, and a growing gap between the rich and the poor. Our ability to compete internationally is sadly deficient—not to mention Mr Beazley's $8 billion black hole. Yet the members opposite have the nerve to ask: why reform?

Labor's accord system, which was supposed to help Australian workers, has stifled them. That system helped a long-term decline in workers' living standards compared with other nations and gave us, this nation, a record level of unemployment. So much for a party which purports to represent the workers!

Under this legislation, employees will not be left out in the cold to fend for themselves against those employers who may seek to exploit them. The Employment Advocate will provide assistance to employees and employers about their rights and obligations. A principal deficiency in the current system is that it requires of employers and employees a degree of familiarity with legal and procedural niceties. Small business people in particular cannot be expected to have such detailed technical knowledge, nor can most afford the services of those who do.

The Employment Advocate will provide a free grievance investigation service, will handle alleged breaches of Australian workplace agreements, will deal with any complaints of duress in reaching an agreement and will deal with freedom of association grievances. The Employment Advocate will pay particular attention to providing support for young people, women and people from non- English speaking backgrounds. At present, of course, it may be theoretically possible for employers and employees to negotiate mutually advantageous agreements. But they are disinclined to do so because of the many obstacles they must overcome before an agreement can be formally sanctioned by an industrial tribunal.

I was a small business operator, and I know that the best assets in one's business are the people who work in it. Employers cannot succeed without them, and employees have nowhere to go without employers. We need each other. We need to work together for mutual benefit.

I am proud of the fact that many years ago the people working in my factory were able to negotiate an agreement whereby everyone benefited. They chose the hours and shifts they wanted to work. They negotiated an over-award payment for themselves. They negotiated a share in the company's profits, which in turn provided an incentive for increased productivity and best work practices. They were prepared to participate in such an arrangement because they understood that, by increasing the efficiency and productivity of the company, not only would they benefit themselves but this would also provide jobs for their mates who did not have one. The point I am trying to make here is that all of these arrangements were entered into without union involvement.

The small business community had two main and very real problems with the previous Labor government: bureaucratic red tape and the unfair dismissal law. I will address the issue of red tape and unnecessary bureaucracy at another time, and I would like to congratulate the Minister for Small Business and Consumer Affairs (Mr Prosser) for his speedy work in addressing this matter.

The unfair dismissal laws of the member for Kingsford-Smith (Mr Brereton) have turned out to be a disaster for this country. That legislation has proved to be the biggest disincentive for employing people. Labor's unfair dismissal provisions are complex and confusing. Under them, employers cannot sack someone who continually lies to them or steals from them.

The proposed new laws will provide a fair go for all. They will be fair to both the employee and the employer. They will provide employees with access to a simpler process of challenging dismissals. They will protect the rights of employees who have been unfairly dismissed. They will discourage frivolous and malicious claims, and they will empower the Australian Industrial Relations Commission to consider whether a termination of employment was harsh, unjust or unreasonable. This bill will give business—small, medium and large—the boost it needs to start employing people again.

Members opposite argue strongly for the unions. I have no problems with that at all, but I have a real problem when they say that we on this side of the House are anti-union. We are not.

Since being elected as the member for Canning, I have lost count of the number of people who have visited or phoned me because they were having problems in their workplaces. I always ask them whether they have spoken with their union. `Yes,' they say, `but they'—meaning the union—`were not interested. They didn't want to know about me,' they say. What a great advertisement for unions. And members opposite cannot understand why union membership has dropped dramatically over the last decade or so. I can tell them categorically that it is because the unions are not servicing the members they are supposed to represent.

Today, many workers are disillusioned with unions and ask why they should pay their union dues. Union bosses are certainly not helping their members. They are more likely to be playing factional politics with members opposite at the expense of the workers. I believe that unions must now be seen as a service provider for their members and not players in their own right.

The abolition of compulsory unionism will guarantee workers genuine freedom of association. This government is committed to giving people a choice. Workers should have the right, and will have the right under this legislation, to have a far greater choice of which union or employer organisation can best represent them.

Workers who believe that their union is not representing them, and there are many who believe this to be true, can vote to establish their own union called an autonomous enterprise branch. They will need only a minimum of 20 members, rather than the present 100 members, to be registered. This truly gives the Australian worker a chance to say who shall represent him or her and this will better cater for the problems that arise within their individual and unique workplaces.

The bill before the House recognises that the role of the tribunal needs to be more facilitative and less prescriptive. When solutions are imposed by outside bodies, not only do they invariably fail to give sufficient weight to purely local factors, they also do not become the property of the parties themselves and, as anyone with practical experience in this area knows, where the parties are not fully committed to a bargain there is little chance of operating it effectively.

This workplace relations bill will benefit women. Under the new legislation, restrictions will be lifted on permanent part-time work. This will particularly help women returning to the work force after a break in their careers. Family-friendly working arrangements between employees and their employers will be possible under this new legislation. Most women do not fit into the standard mould of working five days a week from nine to five. Indeed, they need flexibility to combine their work with their family responsibilities.

I note that the present arrangements have perpetuated a lack of flexibility in relation to the employment of part-time and casual workers. Many awards are overly prescriptive about how such forms of employment are to operate. Current arrangements which set employment quotas for part-time workers or prescribe minimum hours of work often hurt those whom they are designed to help most.

Under Labor's award system it is hard for people, particularly women, to get any sort of permanent part-time work. Casual employment is the only real option yet the uncertainty of this is not realistic. By lifting the restriction on regular part-time work this bill will increase the opportunities for people to work part-time with set conditions such as sick leave.

In addition, personal and carers leave and parental leave will be guaranteed. Dismissal based on discriminatory grounds such as pregnancy will continue to be unlawful. Pay discrimination on the basis of sex will not be allowed in awards or agreements.

To sum this up, the safety net remains in place. Awards, fair minimum wages and conditions for all employees will continue. Viewed in its historical context, this bill consolidates the gains made by federal workers under the award system by preserving existing benefits as legislated minima or award based rights. It is not an attack on community standards or basic rights. What the bill does is recognise the practical distinction between broadly based community standards and requirements and the need in a competitive economy for workers and employers to establish working arrangements which meet the demands of the individual workplace.

This bill will promote genuine cooperation between employees and their employers. It will give Australians greater choice and more incentive, and that is what we on this side of the House are all about.