Dr NELSON (3:29 PM) —My question is addressed to the Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business. Has the minister's attention been drawn to reports of moves to abolish all collective non-union agreements? Could the gains achieved by Australian workers under the Howard government's workplace relations policies be threatened if such measures were adopted?

Mr REITH (Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business) —I thank the member for Bradfield for his question. There is no doubt that those gains which we have seen in recent years are at risk. We have seen 600,000 jobs created, a big improvement in productivity and higher pay for workers, particularly low paid workers. We have seen a big improvement in the real value of their pay. Contrary to all the claims of our political opponents, the number of industrial disputes in Australia has come down as a result of reforms, amongst other things, that we have introduced.

Opposition members interjecting—

Mr REITH —That figure on your long-term disputes is wrong as well. There was a conference in Melbourne, I am told—I did not attend this section of it—where the shadow minister made that very claim and he was soon put down by Mark Wooden, who really does know what he is talking about. We see the same threat federally as we are seeing happen in reality in the state of Victoria. A Labor government has been elected and already, without any legislation, the climate for investment and the creation of jobs is taking jobs out of Victoria, at a very heavy price for all Victorians.

The framework of policy under Labor, if Labor were ever to be elected, is slowly coming out into the marketplace. We had the submission by the member for Charlton the other day. She is in favour of the abolition of all individual agreements—Australian workplace agreements. These would be abolished under Labor. Labor have already said they will abolish the Employment Advocate, one of whose jobs is to protect employees and provide basic protection of their rights as employees. And now we see from the Financial Review this morning that another document is out and about. This one apparently is entitled `Draft of ALP policy'. As we always say, their policy is drafted by the unions. This one actually says that on the front of it.

Under this proposal we have all the usual pro-union policies so enamoured of the Labor Party and the people who push them around, namely, the trade union leadership. There will be right of entry into every business. Whatever your small business, the Labor Party will give a union official—even when there are no union members in your business—the right to walk in and push you around. The unions will be given a right, effectively, to veto agreements between employers and employees even when not one member of that business is a member of a union. In that respect there are something like 200,000 employees covered by direct agreements with employers. Those agreements will be out the window because they are not union agreements as required by the Labor Party.

The latest union membership numbers show a further decline in trade union members. Yet, as their numbers decline, the power and influence over the frontbench by the trade union movement grows. Under their policy, you would have patent bargaining given a complete green light—industry-wide sectors being allowed to bargain, regardless of the circumstances of business. The unions are talking about setting up sectoral councils, so you will have a manufacturing council, a maritime council and a building industry council. Those opposite laugh, but that is their policy being dictated to them by the trade union movement. It will do nothing but cost jobs. Not only do they look after their mates in terms of increased power to the unions; there is also a proposal to provide new funding for unions to allow them to take legal action against employers, paid for by the taxpayers at substantial cost. But, again, who is in the gun? It is the small business person who cannot afford the legal fees when being pursued by their union mates.

Mr REITH —The fact is that, in the end, this is just an attack on small business at the behest of an increasingly irrelevant trade union movement which finds nothing easier than pushing around—

Mr SPEAKER —I warn the member for Lyons.

Mr REITH —the Leader of the Opposition when it comes to policy and pursuing their own benefits. On tax, as the Treasurer says, it is a roll back policy in dealing with Labor state premiers and giving them what they want. When it comes to the unions, it is a rollover policy.