3 August, 2012
Capital Hill ABC24
With Latika Bourke and Senator Trish Crossin
2 August 2012
5.30pm
E & OE
Subjects: Fair Work review, National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS)
LATIKA BOURKE:
Joining me to discuss this report are two senators, Trish Crossin in Darwin and Mitch Fifield in Melbourne. Trish Crossin firstly to you. Why should we put faith in this report?
TRISH CROSSIN:
Well this report was conducted by three expert people eminent in this field, in this country. Professor Ron McCallum for example, has an outstanding record on his knowledge of industrial relations. So this is a report that was actually done by people in the field who understand the issues they’re tackling with. We don’t think it’s appropriate for the Productivity Commission to look at this report at all.
LATIKA BOURKE:
Why not Trish? Why not? You asked the Productivity Commission to look at a whole range of policies so why not this one?
TRISH CROSSIN:
Well this is about actually ensuring the legislation that outlines the industrial relations system in this country is working in the way in which that act is meant to work and it was designed to work. So we’ve given it to three experts in that field. As I said, Professor Ron McCallum is an outstanding expert in that field. That’s the task they’ve undertaken and they’ve delivered the report to the Government, which has been released today.
LATIKA BOURKE:
Mitch Fifield, these are three eminent Australians, do you accept their opinion?
MITCH FIFIELD:
What a surprise. The three people hand-picked by Bill Shorten to undertake the review of the Fair Work Act find that the Fair Work Act is terrific.
LATIKA BOURKE:
So are you questioning their bias, Mitch Fifield?
MITCH FIFIELD:
What I’m questioning is the fact that people were chosen to do a particular task and they did it. One of the constraints in this exercise were the terms of reference. The Office of Best Practice Regulation wasn’t happy with the terms of reference. They weren’t happy with the fact that Bill Shorten took out of the terms of reference any mention of reducing the compliance burden on business. And they weren’t happy that Bill Shorten took out of the terms of reference any reference to flexibility and finding a balance between the needs of employers and employees. So the fix was in from the outset with the terms of reference of this inquiry. It would have been much better if it had been undertaken by the Productivity Commission. The Productivity Commission is truly independent, and it has demonstrated through inquiries into things such as the National Disability Insurance Scheme and also earlier work that they’ve done on gaming, that they have the capacity and do take into account not only economic consequences of policy but also social consequences. So if the Productivity Commission had done it, we would have had a fair dinkum and independent review.
LATIKA BOURKE:
Trish Crossin, the objectives of the legislation, the whole purpose of this review, now the review panel has found that the Fair Work Act is operating as intended and that the objectives have been met. But is Mitch right there? That perhaps it’s the intentions and the objectives that are the problem and that this panel was not charged to look at those.
TRISH CROSSIN:
Well I think if you have a look at the objectives for the legislation then the words ‘productivity’ and the words ‘flexibility’ and the words ‘balance’ are there. They talk about a productive and flexible workplace. So if you actually look at the objectives of the Fair Work Act and if you have a look at the work this panel has done, then they’ve actually shown that the act has been vindicated. That the act actually does show that there is fairness for workers and there is flexibility for employees. I mean what Mitch is on about is that he doesn’t like the outcome, the outcome isn’t saying what he wants it to say, and so therefore the Liberal Party just bag it. What I say is, well Mitch what would your policy be? What would you want in a report such as this? We haven’t seen the Liberal Party policy in relation to industrial relations; it’s a closet policy and probably will only be released at the very last minute. Another cloak and dagger trick for people around this country. See the one thing the Liberal Party doesn’t want us to do is to talk about and debate industrial relations in this country.
LATIKA BOURKE:
Mitch Fifield, that’s a fair point, when are you going to reveal your policy?
MITCH FIFIELD:
We know the Australian Labor Party is completely obsessed by industrial relations. We don’t have that obsession. We don’t bring an ideological approach to industrial relations, which is why we think it would have been better to have the independent Productivity Commission take a look at this legislation.
LATIKA BOURKE:
So if you’re not bringing an ideological position, why are you so scared to release the policy?
MITCH FIFIELD:
We’re not scared. What we’re doing is we’re taking the time to sit down and talk to employers and employees. To hear from them the real life, practical working of the Fair Work legislation. We’re bringing very much a problem solving approach to the Fair Work Act. We want to identify issues that are a constraint…
LATIKA BOURKE:
You haven’t identified those issues yet?
MITCH FIFIELD:
Our spokesman Eric Abetz is in the process of undertaking that exercise. We will put forward practical solutions to real life problems, and we’ll do that in good time before the election.
LATIKA BOURKE:
Well I do want to move to some specific recommendations of this panel, but before we do, let’s take a look at the response to this review from the unions and employer groups.
TIM LYONS (file footage):
The release of the Fair Work Act review report today is a victory for working people. Employers went into it with a wish list. It was for virtually no safety net. It was for virtually no powers for the independent umpire. It was about unfair individual contracts and it was about banning people from having proper representation at work. Today, that policy prescription has been completely rejected by the Fair Work Act review.
PETER ANDERSON (file footage):
The Fair Work industrial relations report will be a bitter disappointment for many in the Australian business community. It says that there is a flagging productivity rate in Australia but it does not actually take the hard decisions that are necessary and in the national interest to do something about it.
LATIKA BOURKE:
Mitch Fifield, this review panel rejected outright the idea of reinstating individual contracts. Will the Opposition be looking to bring them back in?
MITCH FIFIELD:
We’re not looking to introduce WorkChoices again and, despite the fact that individual contracts are actually something that predated WorkChoices and the previous Labor Governments put in place, we’re not looking to do either of those two things. We are however, looking to see if there are ways of injecting greater flexibility. The Fair Work review was mugged, in one respect, by reality. And they themselves say the individual flexibility agreements can be improved. But we will also look to other ways of improving productivity. That would have been one of the great benefits of having the Productivity Commission look at the Fair Work Act, is to see if not only there have been constraints on productivity but also if there are practical things that can be done to further lift the capacity of business to employ people and to pay good wages.
LATIKA BOURKE:
Trish Crossin, do you support the recommendation to reduce the number of public holidays nation-wide to just eleven?
TRISH CROSSIN:
Well what we’ve done with the 53 recommendations is say that we will now use this time to get back out there and consult with employers, with workers and with the unions, with stakeholders about those 53 recommendations. The Government will then provide their response to those recommendations once we’ve undertaken some more and consistent consultations about those recommendations. But can I just say Latika, in regards to Mitch Fifield’s last two responses, they are absurd. They are a joke. If anybody listening to what Mitch just had to say, they couldn’t believe one word of it. The Liberal Party are the puppet of the HR Nicholls Society, who have said that they totally want the WorkChoices Act abolished. They totally want it appealed. And we know that the Liberal Party are committed to individual contracts, despite what Mitch is saying. We know that they’re committed to actually reducing the number of days
LATIKA BOURKE:
Trish, he’s just ruled that out. Mitch Fifield just ruled that out. Are you accusing him of lying?
TRISH CROSSIN:
Well he didn’t answer your question.
LATIKA BOURKE:
Yes he did. Yes he did say that there would be no individual contracts returned.
TRISH CROSSIN:
Ah yes, but ask him if he believes they will go back to Australian Workplace Agreements. Ask him if they will call individual contracts by another name. ask him if he will actually have in his policies the right to actually have a contract between a single person and an employer, rather than a collective contract. So let’s ask a range of questions and see if you get the same answer.
LATIKA BOURKE:
Alright Mitch, I’ll give you a chance to answer those questions then.
MITCH FIFIELD:
We’re not returning to WorkChoices. Full stop. End of story. We fully expect the Australian Labor Party will run their 2007 and 2010 campaign again at the next election. Good luck to them. But we’re not going to be returning to WorkChoices.
LATIKA BOURKE:
Mitch, one of the other things to come out of this is penalty rates. Now the unions are saying that there is no productivity link between penalty rates. Do you accept that argument?
MITCH FIFIELD:
As I say, we’re not going to be returning to WorkChoices and we’re not in the business of seeking to take payments away from people. We want an industrial relations system that will see more jobs and see people better paid.
LATIKA BOURKE:
But you do want to change unfair dismissal laws, don’t you?
MITCH FIFIELD:
That has been something that has been a problem that businesses have bought to us over many years. But the details of our policy, we will release those in good time. As the shadow for disabilities, I’m not in a position to tell you what the elements of that policy will be. But the Australian public will have good time to assess them and to compare our policy to that of the Australian Labor Party.
LATIKA BOURKE:
Well let’s go to your portfolio issue of disabilities, and Trish Crossin, why won’t the Government work with the Opposition on this? It is a reform that is going to span many parliaments.
TRISH CROSSIN:
Well we’d like to work with the Opposition on this except that the Opposition want another talkfest. They want another parliamentary committee to look at the issues. What we want to do is just get on and get on the ground and get it working. We want to start to put this in place. We want to make sure that a plan for a National Disability Insurance Scheme is rolled out in those trial sites so to start to actually improve the lives of people with a disability. To make access to disability services easier, to get rid of some of the red tape and to have local coordinators. We say that the time for further talk, more chats and more discussion is over. It’s time to act. So we would actually like Tony Abbott and we’d like you Mitch, to come with us and start acting on this rather than talking about it more.
LATIKA BOURKE:
Well Mitch, we don’t have much time left but just very quickly, if you’re elected next year, what year can we expect the National Disability Insurance Scheme to be rolled out under a Coalition Government?
MITCH FIFIELD:
We think that the Productivity Commission timetable is achievable and that it is the best proposal that has been put forward to date. But in relation to our suggestion for a joint parliamentary committee chaired by both sides of politics, the idea is not to be a talkfest. It’s to find a mechanism to elevate the NDIS beyond partisanship and to ensure that there is a mechanism to oversight its implementation. And to make sure that the NDIS is owned by the parliament as a whole, and not any one side of politics.
LATIKA BOURKE:
Ok, well we’ve run out of time so we’ll have to wrap it up. Thank you Trish Crossin and Mitch Fifield for joining us on Capital Hill today.