Mr STEPHEN SMITH (2:40 PM) —My question is again to the Prime Minister. I refer the Prime Minister to comments made by the Treasurer on 26 July. In relation to the government’s planned unfair dismissal laws, the Treasurer said:

Prime Minister, given the Treasurer’s refusal in question time today to repudiate that statement, does the Treasurer’s view represent government policy?

Mr HOWARD (Prime Minister) —Never bank on a fair repetition of a quote from this side of the House by the mob who sit opposite. Let me simply say that the government has announced its policy, and that policy is to remove the unfair dismissal laws on up to 100. That will be legislated.

While I am on my feet, can I just remind those who sit opposite of a few realities in relation to the effect of these unfair dismissal laws. These unfair dismissal laws are not some ancient Magna Carta right. They were introduced by Laurie Brereton in 1994 and they have in fact had the effect of destroying—not producing—jobs. We want to change the unfair dismissal laws in the name of lifting employment.

We draw on the evidence of other countries. It is very interesting that those countries that have the lowest unemployment are those countries that have the less heavily regulated labour markets. Those that have the highest unemployment, such as Germany and France, are those that have the most heavily regulated labour markets. By abolishing the unfair dismissal laws in relation to firms with up to 100 employees, we will be generating jobs for small business and we will be removing the disincentive and intimidating effect of these laws.

I remind those who sit opposite that this has been a commitment of this government since 1995. We went to the 1996 election pledging to get rid of Labor’s unreasonable unfair dismissal laws and we believe the proposal to remove them on businesses of up to 100 employees strikes the right balance and will be of immense benefit to the small business men and women of Australia.