Page 794 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 29 March 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
action to support claims against an employer, to disrupt work or to advance the industrial interests of a trade union. In short, this legislation virtually removes the right to strike for workers in the construction industry.
The absurd nature of this legislation was demonstrated by the community day of national protest last week, which saw 500,000 Australians on the streets protesting against government legislation. Yet the Australian Building and Construction Commissioner, John Lloyd, suggested that in exercising their democratic rights those who worked in the building industry were in breach of the BCII act. These workers were not seeking a pay rise or reduced working hours; they were protesting against far-reaching federal government law, as is their right in a free society. Yet under these laws they face massive fines. As Mr Gentleman’s motion points out, individuals face up to $22,000 fines for exercising a right that is enshrined in international law.
The federal government’s empty rhetoric in this area, as in virtually all areas, is choice. Like their work choices legislation, these amendments are supposed to free the parties to negotiate, yet this legislation removes a reasonable and internationally protected bargaining chip in all employees’ hands—the right to strike. Like work choices, it unreasonably tips the balance of power in the employer’s favour. Through their work choices legislation, better bargaining bill and the BCII, the federal government continue to flout their international obligations. When you consider that Australia is also increasingly isolated in the OECD as a country without a human rights act or paid maternity leave, you are left to wonder if any other commonwealth government has ever ignored its international obligations to such a degree.
Not surprisingly, the governing body of the ILO recently announced that it had found that the BCII act breaches core international labour standards. The ILO has requested the Australian government to take the necessary steps to modify their laws, to keep the ILO informed about how they will improve the laws, especially how they will “eliminate excessive impediments, penalties or sanctions against industrial action” in the building and construction industry. In its finding, the committee said that the right to bargain collectively with employers is an essential element of freedom of association, and trade unions should have the right, through collective bargaining or other lawful means, to seek to improve the living and working conditions of those whom the trade unions represent, and the public authorities should refrain from any interference that would restrict this right. That is a damning indictment of the federal government.
Mr Gentleman’s motion makes reference to the government’s decision to threaten workers with six months jail for simply refusing to answer questions. I, as I know the minister is, am very concerned about this threat, and in the context of the building industry it cannot go unmentioned. Under intense criticism, largely sparked by the brave actions of the Chief Minister, the federal government has sought to justify its strict antiterror regime.
Less attention has been given to the government’s legislation in this area, which gives wide-ranging interrogation powers to the Building Industry Taskforce. This task force is made up mainly of ex-policemen and has extensive investigative powers. These include threatening interviewees with six months jail if they refuse to answer questions. This is an extraordinary attack on the right to silence, described by the High Court as a human right that protects personal freedom, privacy and dignity from the power of the state.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .