Mr RUDD (2:39 PM) —My question also is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. I refer to the minister’s previous answer, where he said there was no methodology capable of comparing apples with apples—comparing AWAs with those employment arrangements that preceded AWAs. Minister, how can the government now claim that workers are better off under AWAs, given that the minister has now told the parliament that there is no methodology available for making any such claim?

Mr HOCKEY (Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service) —The Leader of the Opposition is telling a porky pie. I made this point: obviously our new regime is far more flexible than the previous regime. It takes into account far more significant factors, such as the fact that you can negotiate on a range of different provisions, as outlined under the Work Choices regime; but the Labor Party do not like that sort of flexibility for workers. They are opposed to flexibility, they are opposed to fairness and they are opposed because the Labor Party are fairly and squarely about the union bosses. It is not about the interests of the workers.

While I am on my feet, I have come across a very interesting news report that has just come out. This AAP report says:

If this is what is happening when the Labor Party are in opposition, what would happen if the Labor Party, on a dark day, were to get into government? The CFMEU would not be worried about the law; they would be going in, in partnership with the Labor Party, to try to recruit members and to get more money for the Labor Party’s scare campaign.