Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Transcript of doorstop interview of the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations: Treasury Place, Melbourne: 15 November 2005
Download PDF THE HON KEVIN ANDREWS MI? Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service
TRANSCRIPT Doorstop Interview, Treasury Place Melbourne 15 November 2005
E&OE ..........................................................................................
KEVIN ANDREWS:Over the last couple of days we’ve seen a continuation of the hysterical overreaction by the union movement to the Government’s proposed workplace relations changes.
This was highlighted yesterday by the outrageous claims by Mr Della Bosca, the New South Wales Minister, that these changes were verging on fascism and that they would lead to riots in the streets like we’re seeing in the media from France and Paris at the present time.
Can I say that unlike Mr Della Bosca, I’ve actually discussed the employment situation in Europe with European ministers in April, and unlike Mr Della Bosca, I actually discussed the situation of employment in Paris with the French Employment Minister-when I visited in April.
The reality so far as France and Paris is concerned is that it is a failure of economic reform in that country that has led to the problems that they’re facing at the present time.
It’s well known that France still has a very rigid labour market, and it’s a consequence of those rigidities and the failure to bring about some flexibility in their labour market that is a major cause of what’s occurring in Paris at the present time.
So not only are the claims outrageous, they’re actually wrong, and I know that on the basis of not just reading reports about what’s been happening there, but discussions that I had, extensive discussions with OECD Employment and Social Ministers, including the French Minister at the time.
But what we see here’s a pattern of behaviour. We had Mr Beazley equating industrial relations changes with terrorism; we had a Labor member in the Victorian Parliament saying that this would lead to women and children being murdered on picket lines in Australia; we’ve had suggestions that the divorce rate would go up; that asbestos-related disease would go up, that the life expectancy of Australians would reduce as a consequence of this; that people would no
longer be able to enjoy a barbecue on the weekend.
Well can I say to Australians when they’re enjoying their barbecue next year, they ought to remember some of these quite hysterical claims that are being made.
QUESTION: [Inaudible] say there are hundreds of thousands of Australians on the streets today. Do you acknowledge that [inaudible]. . .
KEVIN ANDRJIWS:Well the Government’s not going to be distracted by rallies and hysterical overreaction. I mean the Productivity Commission pointed out recently that if we continue the process of economic reform, that could lead to as much as a increase in the gross household income of Australians of up to $22,000.
And what we’re on about is the responsible thing, and that is how do we continue to grow the Australian economy, how do we continue to bring about the conditions that will see more jobs in Australia, and that we will see, continue an increase in real wages in this country.
So we’re going to act in the national interest and not in the interests of certain vested interest groups in society.
I mean what would the next generation of Australians say to us if in five or ten years time we have not taken the responsible action that we ought to take to continue to ensure as best we can that Australia maintains a strong economy. So it’s about the jobs of the very people, some of whom were in the streets today.
QUESTION: [Inaudible]
KEVIN ANDREWS:Not today Mark. Look, I don’t know. I know that after the rally in June that there were suggestions of quite considerable economic cost, but I haven’t seen those figures and maybe over the next few days there’ll be some indication of it.
QUESTION: [Inaudible}
KEVIN ANDREWS: Well what I would say to Australians, whether they were the people on the streets today or the probably 95% of Australians who were in their workplaces today working, is that firstly, look at the record of this Government over the last 10 years. That record speaks for itself. We’ve seen a 15% increase in real wages and we’ve seen a 1.7 million increase in jobs in Australia.
So what we’ve been on about is bringing about the economic conditions that we can have a strong economy which ultimately is the only guarantee of jobs and wages in Australia.
Can I remind you that in the late 1980s we had a very rigid workplace relations system. It didn’t stop the recession we had to have, it didn’t stop a million people being unemployed in this country. And what Paul Keating belatedly recognised in the early 1990s was that we had to move away from that rigidity, and in a sense we are just continuing that evolutionary path.
But if we don’t do it, then people would look back in 10 years time and say you had an opportunity to do this as a government and you didn’t take it. Why didn’t you take it? And they would condemn us for it.
QUESTION: [Inaudible]
KEVIN ANDREWS:Look, I don’t know what the numbers are, and the police will put a final estimate on that, and I’m not going to comment on what the numbers are. I’ve seen various reports of them. But the police will give us an estimate of what the numbers were, as they usually do at the end of this process.
But importantly, our message is how do we ensure that not only those people who were there today, but every other Australian who’s in the workforce, and importantly those Australians who want to be in the workforce - remembering we’ve got 5% or so unemployment at the moment, but that still means that there are some hundreds of thousands of Australians who haven’t got a job. And part of our responsibility is to try and bring about the circumstances where as many
Australians as possible can get a job. And that’s what we’re on about.
QUESTION: [Inaudible]
KEVIN ANDREWS: Well I think Australians, when they’re sitting around their barbecue next year, as they’ll continue to do, or when they’re sharing a public holiday with their chldren, will actually start to ask themselves what all this hysteria was about. I mean it is totally over the top.
Equating IR changes with terrorism, saying that this is going to lead eventually to riots in the streets of Australia like we’ve seen in Paris, to be saying that women and children will be killed and worse than that, having the President of the ACTU caught on film saying wouldn’t it be great for OUT campaign if we had the mum or dad of someone who’s been injured or killed in an accident, that’d be fantastic.
I mean that really set the tenor of the entire approach, the entire campaign that the unions have been running. I believe it’s been irresponsible, it’s certainly been hysterical, and Australians will ultimately judge it that way.
QUESTION: It’s estimated there were 150-odd thousand people [inaudible] politicians and unionists, but also a lot of average mums and dads out there [inaudible]. . .
KEVLN ANDREWS:Look, I thnk ultimately a thing like this, that the message as you say is the actual experience of it. It’ll be when people live and work under the changes that they will make their judgements individually and within their families about it.
But the type of rhetoric we are hearing was similar to the rhetoric we heard in 1996, you know, the sky was going to fall in 1996, you know, brother was going to be pitted against brother in 1996.
Now that didn’t happen, the opposite happened, and I think Australians understand what’s happened over the last 10 years. And what we’re saying is what we have to do now is to make some further evolutionary change if we want to sustain jobs and sustain the economy in the hture. Now if we don’t do that we will be judged harshly by history for not having done that
which is responsible to do at the present time.
QUESTION: You said in your speech Minister, on Friday, that the new laws will take effect fi-om March. Could you just explain the reasons why, [inaudible] January 1, why are you [inaudible]?
KEVIN ANDREWS:Well there are a number of machinery provisions that have to be put in place, and they cannot be done overnight. We can’t start doing that until the laws pass through the parliament, because we have to have the certainty of what’s passed through both houses of parliament.
There are machinery provisions that need to be put in place. There are regulations that need to be drafted. All of that’s going to take a number of weeks, and the best estimate that I have at the present time is that it will be from March.
I don’t want to give you a date as in March 1 or March 2, or whatever, but in general terms, what we’re looking at is the new system starting from March.
I think it’s also important for another perspective, and that is, you know, employers and employees obviously will need a little time to actually look at how it works in operation on the ground.
I mean there’s a lot of discussion; there’s a lot of debate; there’s a lot of rhetoric flying around; but when this is in place, then a lot of people will be saying, well, I need to have a look at it now; how’s it going to affect my business, the way I’m employed, those sorts of things.
So, I think it makes sense to have a period of time, but we have to have it anyway.
QUESTION: What about the [inaudible] now suggesting they may just seek the High Court to injunct [inaudible] ?
KEVIN ANDREWS:Oh look, this, look our constitutional advice all through is that we’re on firm grounds in reliance upon the Corporations Power. It would be a highly unusual step for the High Court to issue an injunction against legislation that’s been duly passed by the parliament. And our advice is quite firm in that regard.
QUESTION: Have you got specific advice on that [inaudible]? ,,
KEVIN ANDREWS:Well, I’ve got advice generally Mark about the whole issue. But whether or not there’s a High Court challenge, we’ll wait and see. If there is, there is. If there isn’t, there isn’t.
QUESTION: Are you confident Barnaby Joyce [inaudible] formal legislation [inaudible]?
KEVIN ANDREWS: Look, I’m confident that all my colleagues are supportive of this legislation. This is not something that we decided overnight. Can I remind you that it’s - what is it, the 1 gfh of November - it’s at least a year ago that I started the process of consultation about this.
I spent many months consulting widely, including the ACTU, in that consultation process. We had long discussions in Cabinet about it. We’ve had further discussions in the party room; in the b ackb ench committee .
I suspect there hasn’t’ been a piece of legislation about which there’s been more consultation than this particular bill, and every member of the Coalition has, you know, had adequate
opportunity, and if there are technical matters that arise out of the Senate Committee hearing this week, then obviously as a sensible thing we’ll look at them.
, QUESTION: [Inaudible] talk about fines for construction workers who walked off the job? Is the government going to follow through on that do you know?
KEVIN ANDREWS: Well that’s a matter for the Building and Construction Commission. It’s an independent body. It has a statute in which it operates under, and that’s a matter for it. It‘s not a matter for the government.
QUESTION: [Inaudible]?
KEVIN ANDREWS: It’s not a matter for me. We’ve put in place some laws. Those laws are about bringing about more lawful behaviour and more lawful activity in the building and construction industry, and you know, we would hope that that industry, like any other industry in Australia, would be one in which whatever activities are carried out, are done so in a lawful manner.
QUESTION: Are you conscious of giving the ALP and Kim Beazley a sniff, a lightning rod [inaudible] policy direction, whereas otherwise they might have kept going [inaudible] galvanise.. .?
KEVIN ANDREWS:Well, I don’t know where Mr Beazley stands on this. Can I just take one issue - that’s Australian workplace agreements. Now we’ve had Kim Beazley out there saying he’s going to tear up the entire piece of legislation.
Now presumably that means he’s going to tear up provisions relating to Australian workplace agreements.
And yet on the other hand, we’ve had Kim Beazley say that he couldn’t undo Australian workplace agreements because there’d be too many losers.
I mean, in his own electorate of Brand, I think there’s something like 13,000 people - 9,000 people, I’m corrected - about 9,000 people who are on Australian workplace agreements.
So, Kim Beazley is trylng to walk both sides of the street. You know, he’s out there with all the rhetoric for the rallies today, yet on the other hand he’s saying, oh no - and we’re gonna tear up the legislation. On the other hand, he’s saying, oh no we can’t do that because there’d be too many losers. And he’s right about that, because people are getting paid more on workplace
agreements than they are, particularly under awards, and under collective agreements.
So, the reality is, Mr Beazley is all over the shop; he hasn’t got a policy about this, and you know, rip up sounds a bit like rollback to me.
QUESTION: Is there another advertising campaign likely to be introduced before the vote is actually taken in the Senate?
KEVIN ANDREWS:No.
QUESTION: So there’ll be one after [inaudible]?
KEVIN ANDREWS:No, we said that we would, we would run the television and the radio and newspaper advertisements until the time at which the legislation was introduced into the parliament, and that’s what we did. We stopped I think a day or so before that. And that’s in accordance with the convention that’s operated, and that is that there is not advertising by the
government during the time of debate in the parliament. And we don’t have an intention to resume that advertising afterwards.
What we will be doing is providing information seminars for people who are operating under the new legislation, but that will be done at a different level. It may well be that we use various business and other associations as part of that. We haven’t finalised the detail yet.
QUESTION: Considering the numbers on the streets, has the money been worth it for the advertising campaign [inaudible]?
KEVIN ANDFtEWS:Oh look, it’s always, it was always predictable that there would be people out on the streets. There’s nothing, nothing unpredictable about this; nothing that we couldn’t have forecast, you know, a few weeks ago.
But, the question is, what’s going to actually lead to better conditions for working men and women in Australia and their families? That’s the real issue. It’s not whether people rally in the streets or not. It’s a question of what’s going to actually lead to a stronger economy in this country, and we firmly believe that further reform of workplace relations will help us to build a stronger economy.
If we don’t do that, we believe that we are not taking the opportunity that we’re elected to take, and that is to ensure, as best we can, given all the vagaries of, you know, the world in which we live, that we should meet our, meet our challenges.
We live in a world of continuing relentless competition. We can’t put our heads in the sand and go away from that. The world doesn’t owe us a living. We’ve got to, we’ve got to make our own way in the world, and we’ve got an ageing population, one of the consequences of which is that we cannot rely on population growth as a major factor underlying economic growth in the future, as we have been able to do over the last four or five decades.
Now, these are challenges facing Australia. And as a responsible government we’re saying, we need to meet those challenges.
Thank you very much.
ENDS
