CASEY HOSPITAL, MELBOURNE
MONDAY, 27 JUNE 2016
BILL SHORTEN: Six days to go in the election and
Labor is most committed to defending Medicare. We've just been visiting
hospitals talking to patients, talking to their parents, talking to the
kids, talking to the hard working staff here at this very, very good
facility. There is no doubt in my mind that defending Medicare against
the ruthless cuts of the Liberal Government is a first order issue for
Australians. Mr Turnbull has made choices in this election, so have I.
Mr Turnbull's chosen to give a $50 billion tax cut to large
corporations. We've chosen to properly fund our hospitals. Mr Turnbull
has chosen to defend banks, we've chosen to defend Medicare. Mr Turnbull
has chosen to keep going ahead with his six year freeze on GP rebates,
we've chosen to unfreeze the rebates. Mr Turnbull has chosen that from
Friday, the bulk-billing incentives which are available for blood tests,
which are available for X-rays, for those bulk-billing incentives, will
be cut. We've chosen not to cut them, and in doing this, we do so
because we fundamentally believe that the health care of all Australians
and any Australians is a matter for all of us. You cannot be Prime
Minister of this great country if you're not prepared to prioritise the
health care of Australians. We believe that an economic plan requires a
healthy Australia. We believe that a prosperous Australia requires an
Australia where it is your Medicare card, not your credit card, which
determines the level of health care.
This election on July 2 will be a referendum on the future of
Medicare, we remain absolutely committed to put forward our positive
plan for health care in this country. Our positive plans to help save
Medicare from the dismantling by Mr Turnbull piece by piece, brick by
brick of our Medicare system. And we are confident that the Australian
people, on July 2, will choose to prioritise and defend Medicare, not
large $50 billion tax cuts for large corporations.
Before I go to questions though, about defending Medicare and other
matters, I feel it is important to talk about the major, massive
corruption scandal facing Mr Turnbull and his Government. If the reports
in today's media are even half true, the Australian Government has lost
control of its visa system to the crooks and criminals. When you look
at the very serious allegations which are being raised, Mr Turnbull has
serious questions to answer about the integrity and administration of
our visa system, and the Government's abject failure to uphold a
straight visa system in this country.
These are serious allegations. Allegations of organised crime,
running immigration rackets, providing false visas which allow people to
illegally enter this country. It's a most serious matter that whilst
this Government has been in charge, the Liberal Government, with senior
ministers serving as Immigration Ministers right under their very noses,
we discover that if you pay up to $50,000 you can get a bogus work visa
to illegal enter this country. Mr Turnbull has to explain to us, how
widespread is this problem? How many tainted work visas are there?
Labor's been calling for reform of the visa system and today's
scandalous revelations require the Government to provide a full
accounting immediately of the crisis in our visa system. The crisis in
our visa system which undermines people's confidence in the ability of
this Government to competently manage anything. Happy to take questions.
JOURNALIST: Has Peter Dutton taken his eye off the
ball here with what you were just talking about in favour his laser-like
focus always being on asylum seekers and part B, isn't this another
reason why Labor should back a Federal ICAC?
SHORTEN: Well there’s plenty in what you say, so let
me take all of the parts of your question, Heath. First of all there
are a million people currently in Australia who have visas which give
them some work rights. It is appalling and astounding and many
Australians will be up in arms as they learn the news that it is
possibly for criminal gangs, for organised crime overseas, to manipulate
and bypass, almost casually, the integrity of our visa system. The fact
that Australian visas are for sale for cash, for sexual favours, for
corruption in other countries, undermines the very heart of our
immigration system. In terms of the investigation and the best response,
let us just recognise that there are even more allegations which are
going to be revealed, we understand, tonight and tomorrow.
But Labor will not allow the Government to sweep this massive
undermining of confidence in the integrity of our visa system. The fact
that this Liberal Government has handed control of our visa system to
criminals and crooks. We believe that the Government must make a full
accounting, we'll certainly see what further facts come to light in the
next 12 hours and 24 hours. We are not going to let this issue rest.
Australians are very concerned to make sure that Australian jobs are
going to people who are properly here. This Government cannot tell us
right now, as we speak, who is here, what are the circumstances in which
they're here, are they actually doing what the visas say they're meant
to be doing, how many people have manipulated the system and got in
under Australia's guard, and then we see a complete breakdown of the
visa system. This is a major crisis for the way we handle visas and the
way we handle people co ming to this country seeking to work. Full stop.
I answered part B by saying we'll watch what gets revealed in the
next 12 hours. There is no doubt in my mind, though, that the Government
simply brushing the matter off and saying that we'll worry about it on
July 3. That won't cut it. I talk to everyday Australians, Labor's been
talking about reforming the visa system. Everyday Australians will
probably at some level think we always wondered if this system is being
reason properly. Now we know it. You have senior ministers, Dutton and
Morrison, renowned for arrogance, renowned for their addiction to
secrecy, and clearly now renowned for their competence at managing the
visa system. This is a major crisis and nothing less than a full
accounting will satisfy the Labor Party.
JOURNALIST: What will you do to get to the bottom of this visa situation and to crackdown to stop these rorts?
SHORTEN: Well, Labor has, we announced a series of
reforms I have to say, not even knowing the extent of the corruption
which has now been revealed. What we've said is that employers should
not be allowed to bring people here unless they've tested the local
labour market. We have to make sure there's more resources for
enforcement, we have to make sure that the job listed on the application
is actually bona fide. What these allegations reveal is that Australian
laws are being gamed by criminals and this government hasn't got a clue
what to do about it. They clearly haven't been aware of it and now we
find out that our visa system is in tatters.
JOURNALIST: Just on Medicare, obviously that is a
focus as we head to July 2. Do you think that voters believe your
message though, considering the latest Newspoll actually has the
Coalition ahead?
SHORTEN: I'm very confident that Australians are
very concerned about the future of Medicare. I have to say to people
that Australians, wherever I go, want to be reassured that we will
defend and save Medicare. They want to hear Labor's policies to make
sure that we keep downward price on the cost of medicine. They want to
hear Labor's policies that we will save bulk-billing in GP clinics. It
was the Royal Australian College of GPs who said that the Liberal
policies mean that 14.5 million Australians will pay more to see the
doctor. Australians want to hear that at least there's one major
political party in this country on their side. The people we just
visited in these hospital wards, they know the importance of well-funded
hospitals, the parents here know the anxiety of long waiting times
making sure their child is okay. Labor is the only party who can be
trusted to properly support our hospitals, to ma ke sure we retain
bulk-billing, to keep downward pressure on the price of prescription
medicine. This is what Australians want and Labor will defend and save
Medicare with every ounce of effort that we can muster before the 2nd.
JOURNALIST: If that's the case though, then why is the Coalition now ahead in the Newspoll?
SHORTEN: Well, I think you're question assumes an election outcome which I don't.
JOURNALIST: On your costings that were released
yesterday afternoon, how can voters trust your economic credentials when
you've said that the deficit will be $16 billion worse over the forward
estimates under Labor?
SHORTEN: We're very determined to reduce the
deficit, but we're not going to do it by smashing household budgets. Our
numbers, our costings which we produced yesterday well in time for the
election, in good faith with the Australian people I might add, our
costings show we achieve balance in the same year they do. And because
we're introducing long-term reforms, what it means is that we can make
long-term improvement to reducing debt, reducing government debt, in the
future because we're making the long term reforms now, without making
savage cuts to the things which really matter to Australians – Medicare
and education. And furthermore, this Government is deceitfully relying
on fake savings which no-one in Australia expects them to be able to
pass. I mean, I think it's long overdue for the Government to reveal
their own costings, don't you?
JOURNALIST: Mr Shorten, your costings yesterday
showed that you're banking the savings from the Coalition's proposed
changes to super, so are you adopting all of their policies and if not,
are you not giving retirees total uncertainty until Labor does reveal
its own plan?
SHORTEN: Well, let’s be straight about
superannuation here. The Government, in their budget, ambushed a lot of
us with their radical changes on superannuation. I'm on record as
expressing severe concerns, like a lot of other people too I might add.
When we are in government, if we win the election, we're going to
revisit these measures because we're not sure how workable they are. The
Government says, hand on heart, they're not retrospective. We're
sceptical of this and if we form a government we'll be in the best
position possible to actually see the accuracy of what they said before
the election as compared to afterwards.
JOURNALIST: Will you be committing to the policy?
SHORTEN: The Government says the changes are not. We
are sceptical of this. Truthfully, what we need is to get the head of
Prime Minister and Cabinet, Finance, and Treasury to actually sit down
and examine these rushed changes by the Government to see if they stack
up or not. Government is the best place for us to do that from.
JOURNALIST: How can you include those savings in your costings unless you're supporting them?
SHORTEN: Well, first of all the Government has
asserted that they’re not retrospective but let's also be very clear
here. When we form a government, if we wn the election, we will revisit
these measures to see their workability, to fully understand if they can
actually be done. There's plenty of people who are saying that these
changes will be very hard to implement. For example, one of them is,
they require people to keep records for ten years retrospectively when
in fact they don't. But, the fact of the matter is that the best place
for us to determine the truth of what the Government's finally said will
be using the most senior public servants if and when we win the
election.
JOURNALIST: Tony Burke this morning talked up the
benefit of ten year costings and you said this election is about
healthcare. Are you going to the election with a questionable bottom
line since you've said nothing on hospital funding beyond the four years
of the budget, and as Chris Bowen said this morning, have your
prioritised schools over hospitals?
SHORTEN: First of all, I don't know if we've seen
the Government's costings over ten years, in terms of health care, and I
can tell you the answer to that, they haven't revealed them. What we're
doing is providing long-term forecasts and long-term analysis of our
position because Australians deserve to be treated with a long-term
vision, not just a short-term fix til after the election. When it comes
to healthcare, we're making it clear that we will unfreeze the GP rebate
going forward and this is a benefit and something we factored in over a
decade. When it comes to retaining the bulk-billing incentives for
diagnostic imaging and for X-rays and for pathology, we've been able to
analyse that over the ten years. With our hospitals agreement in
particular, we are optimistic that because of our better planned, more
productive investments we're making over four years, and these are four y
ear agreements with the states, that at the conclusion of four years,
especially if Labor gets elected on July 2, we will have achieved
improvements which will actually see us be able to estimate lower costs
in hospitals than we otherwise would.
JOURNALIST: Picking up on that point, how do you
anticipate those costs for hospital will be lower? What are you basing
that upon? This morning we heard Andrew Leigh say that all the costings,
all the amounts for hospital funding are in the costings. Is that true
and does that mean you wouldn't you renegotiate with state and territory
governments for future hospital funding past the forwards?
SHORTEN: I'll answer that but I realise it was a
second part of the earlier question which I just want to come to about
education and healthcare. We've made choices about what we've
prioritised. We are prioritising defending Medicare and we are
prioritising properly funding schools. What we're not prioritising is
giving a $50 billion tax cut to large corporations.
In terms of your question, the hospital agreements are negotiated
every four years. What we've done in our hospital funding package, which
I know has been well received at the Monash Hospital here, is that we
are providing extra resources for hospitals, full stop. We're going to
the 50 per cent efficient pricing of what states require to run their
hospital system. Now, what we've seen from efficient pricing when Labor
last negotiated the hospital agreement, is we have seen improvements to
the bottom line, both in patient care in terms of performance and in
terms of cost. What we're also doing, apart from that 50 per cent
efficient, funding delivering reforms in hospitals, is that we're also
providing additional money to help reduce waiting lists for elective
surgery, waiting times in emergency hospital wards of hospitals. So that
combination of reform we believe will generate improvements but we'll
have to see how that system rolls out and you can't be in a position to
know the success of those reforms until we've undergone that period.
One thing I can guarantee, Mr Turnbull's not funding hospitals as
well as we are. Full stop. Mr Turnbull's making changes which will
discourage bulk-billing, which means that patients in some cases,
tragically and sadly, defer going to see the doctor until they're
sicker. He is increasing the price of prescription medicine and he's
cutting the bulk-billing incentives for blood tests and for X-rays. This
all means that the prospect for Australians is they're going to pay
more for their healthcare if Mr Turnbull's returned on 2nd of July and that is a statement beyond doubt. Sorry I might share the questions around.
JOURNALIST: If Labor has nothing to hide with its
costings why won't you release the PBO correspondence and how many of
your policies does the PBO rate as low reliability?
SHORTEN: First of all, if we talk about hide and
seek, the hide and seek game of this election is finding the Coalition
costings, isn't it? We should almost set up a competition because
they're not producing them. Labor brought out a costings panel. These
are very respected leaders in the business world, very respected
business minds, very respected accounting minds. Our costings panel has
looked at all of our propositions and they've put their name to it. I'll
back that up against Scott Morrison who can't produce his costings. At
some point the Australian people deserve to hear from the Government on
their costings, we've put ours out on the table. We've done it earlier
than people have done it ever before in the past. Remember the Hockey
ambush on the nation and the nation's media, dolling it out on the
Thursday night before the election? I know that some of you have
forensically as ked me, will you release your costings? We have and we
stand by our costings, full stop.
JOURNALIST: Given healthcare is your focus this week, why aren't you –
SHORTEN: It's one of our focuses.
JOURNALIST: Why aren't you giving the states an
idea about how much you're budgeting for hospitals over the ten years
,and also which have you backed away from your promise to fully return
the money that the Abbott-Joe Hockey budget took out of hospitals?
SHORTEN: Well, first of all, we're doing what all
the other political parties are doing with the hospital profile, we're
providing four years. So we're doing nothing more or less in terms of
transparency about the hospitals. What we are doing on hospitals though,
which our opponents are not doing, is we're properly funding hospitals.
I'll tell you what, if you did a straw poll of eight states and
territories, they're pretty keen to get their hands on our hospitals
package. I'm not saying the Liberal premiers won't vote for Liberal
candidates, but I am saying their little inner health child is saying,
gee, I just wish Malcolm Turnbull had done what Labor have done. I've
got no doubt about that. When you look at the AMA, for instance, or the
Royal College of GPs, the Royal Australian College of GPs, they know the
greatest challenges to our health costs are l osing bulk-billing
through the freezing of rebate and of course properly funding hospitals.
I can go to every hospital in Australia and say vote Labor because
we'll provide for more funding for hospitals. I can go to every
Australian who is currently on an elective surgery waiting list for hip
replacements, for knee reconstructions and say vote Labor because we're
actually going to make it more possible for you to have your surgery
more quickly. I can look at everyone who uses prescription medicine and
purchases prescription medicine and say vote Labor because we're
actually keeping the price down and we're scrapping the price hike.
And I can do all of that because we are not doing Mr Turnbull's key
number one economic plan, which is a $50 billion tax give away to large
companies. That is why we can make the promises we're making, full
stop.
JOURNALIST: On the superannuation again, are you not
leaving older voters and retirees in limbo by not admitting what your
policy is going to be? Do you not consider them an important demographic
in the lead-up to Saturday's poll?
SHORTEN: My words, I think all superannuants have
been deeply let down by this government. Our policies on superannuation
have always been well cast and well advised and consulted well in
advance of this election. It was in the middle of last year that we
proposed reforming the top end of superannuation tax concessions. What
we've also said is that we want to restore the money which with the tax
credit, which was the tax deduction which was available for people who
earn less than $37,000 a year. There's 3.5 million Australians earn less
than $37,000 a year. Currently, when they pay their superannuation
they've got to pay 15 per cent tax on their superannuation, which is in
many cases is higher than their actual marginal rate of taxation. The
Government scrapped that tax deduction which would have seen literally
hundreds and thousands of dollars put forward into people's low paid
workers' superann uation accounts, and through our campaigning, we're
able to make sure that that is reversed and that low income
superannuants, low income workers get better superannuation.
In terms of what the Government's doing, we have concerns with the
way they're implementing and rolling out. These changes are not due to 1
July, 2017. I'm confident if you get a government in charge who
actually understands superannuation, we can move beyond the shocks and
surprises which this government administered with no warning on budget
night this year.
JOURNALIST: Just on super, you haven't answered the
question as to how Labor can actually hang on to the Government's
revenue from these retrospective super changes and not implement them
retrospectively yourself. Are you planning some other hit to super that
we don't know about, and secondly, you've complained about a $57 billion
funding shortfall for health, yet your costings don't complete that
shortfall, don't fix it. Are you going to make any more health funding
announcements this week that might get you there?
SHORTEN: Well first of all, I'm pleased that The Australian
newspaper is recognising there’s a debate about these changes are
retrospective, because that has been something which has concerned us
and if there's been a change of –
JOURNALIST: And we've written about it before, many times –
SHORTEN: If there is a change of editorial
policy which is actually saying these things are retrospective, that's a
development in the public debate. Let me be very direct about this, I
have grave concerns about the way this Government is handling
superannuation. They froze the 9.5 per cent increase going up to 12 per
cent, they froze it. They're happy to pocket 15 per cent
superannuation themselves as a defined benefit, this government, but
they have not supported working Australians lift super from 9.5 per cent
to 12 per cent. Then this government made a whole lot of unannounced
changes on budget night which has caused great consternation. The best
place for us to work through these changes, to understand the
implications, is from government, and that is what we're going to do.
You asked about the $57 billion too, I beg your pardon so did someone
earlier on. We would like to reverse every cut this government's done,
but we have to make hard decisions. This government has smashed a lot of
the issues which were important to Australians. Remember in 2013, in
the week before the election, Tony Abbott said there would be no cuts to
health care, no cuts to education? Then in the 2014 budget that's
exactly what they did. We called them out on that. Not everyone agreed
with us, as I recall, but we called them out on that. What we are doing,
is we are doing improvements to what the Government is doing in health
care. The simple fact of the matter is though, is this Government has
tripled the deficit, the simple fact of the matter is this Government
has increased net public sector debt on every Australian in the country.
The fact of the matter is this Government has caused a lot of harm, we
can't un do every bit of the harm, but what we are doing is we are
reversing $12 billion worth of cuts to Medicare and bulk-billing and the
GP rebate. We are reversing approximately $3 billion worth of price
hikes that they're putting on other PBS, we are actually opposing cuts
which over ten years will see something approaching $3 billion in terms
of bulk-billing incentives for diagnostic imaging centres and for
pathology labs, and of course our hospitals package is much more
generous than what the Government's offering, and so is the package
we're offing for elective surgery. So when you total all those things
up, we're a much better prospect for the health of Australians than the
Government.
JOURNALIST: There is some independent praise for
your release of costings yesterday and the rigour of the figures,
there's also a view among experts that your budget deficits over the
forward estimates would increase the risk of Australia losing its
triple-A credit rating. Do you acknowledge that if you run the budget
deficits you say you will run that there is a real risk Australia will
lose its credit rating anyway?
SHORTEN: Complete rubbish. Not that you asked that
question, but the proposition behind it. The only party in this election
who has had the credit agencies question their ability to hang on to
the triple-A credit rating is the Government. The fact of the matter is
we're making long-term changes. It would be perhaps easy for us just to
simply adopt every fake measure the Government has and say, see we could
make it look better, but we knows that’s not right. We know that, for
instance, the proposition that this government is ever going to increase
the work age to 70, we know that won't get through any Senate of any
foreseeable makeup of the future. So this government is massaging its
own budget numbers based on false savings, zombie measures, I think
they're known as.
By contrast, what we're doing is we're implementing change, but for
instance with negative gearing, we're doing its prospectively. What
we're doing is all existing investors, they invest under these rules,
they're fine, because that's where we head and so we could make quicker
measures, but the point about it is that would affect people more,
disadvantage people far more, so we're going to do slow and steady
improvement, structural budget reform without smashing household
budgets.
JOURNALIST: Mr Shorten, What would you say to
Victorians who are considering not voting for you on Saturday out of
spite for the way Daniel Andrews has handled the CFA dispute, and
secondly, after the riots in northern parts of Melbourne yesterday,
would you consider perhaps banning the burning of flags?
SHORTEN: Let's talk about the first question that
you asked and I think in your question you answered it, you’re saying,
is the CFA and a decision by Mr Andrews something which should be a
reason to vote in a Federal election? You're quite right, they are
separate matters, you are quite right. The fact of the matter is the
safety of all Victorians is what interests me. I have no doubt that
career firefighters and voluntary firefighters and their leaders will
sort these issues out. I'm a bit disappointed that it has taken as long
as it has, but, as I've said in the past, in each negotiation there is
always a start, middle and end. Volunteers are at the heart of the CFA
and I've got no doubt this will be resolved and I've got no doubt that
it is a state issue. I think it's interesting today that Mr Turnbull's
so-called political solution doesn't appear to stack up legally. I t
hink what is important is the volunteers and career firefighters are not
used as pawns in some Federal election when in fact the solution
resides far closer to home at the state level.
In terms of burning the flag, I deplore burning the flag. Anyone who
burns the flag is an idiot. I don't think we need a law to ban burning
the flag, frankly, I think everyone knows it is a stupid, idiotic thing
to do and I think 99.999 per cent of Australians think it is an idiot
act to do. One more question.
JOURNALIST: One more question on Border Force. One
of the main whistleblowers is a Joseph Petyanszki, he was an
investigative chief for the Immigration Department from 2007 to 2013.
You're saying today there is a full-blown crisis, surely then, it began
on Labor's watch?
SHORTEN: No, I don't think that’s the case. I think
that it was Labor who instituted a Customs Reform Board, I think they
had a number of eminent Australians, David Mortimer, a business leader,
former Police Commissioner Ken Moroney, Justice Wood. Now that was set
up to improve the operations in terms of the culture of customs. What
happened is this, though, this government merged customs in a sort
of sidelining and abolishing the oversight of these very important
people who could have, I think, potentially make a difference. This
government, on its watch, has undermined our visa system. I think that
it is outrageous, leave aside an election or not, that we don't know
that the people coming here on work visas are bona fide. I think it is
outrageous and undermines the integrity of our visa system to find out
if there are hundreds of allegations, even if half of them are true,
this is an incompetent gove rnment who has not been managing the visa
system. Now the visa system is in crisis, there is no doubt in my mind
that this government has lost control of the visa system in favour of
criminals and crooks and this government needs to answer these questions
right now
There are no trees in this industrial laneway and with the sky overcast it’s as grey as it is miserable – but Fletch and his colleagues are maintaining their uncomfortable vigil. Two weeks ago, he and more than 50 other fitters and electricians from CUB were summoned to a meeting at a hotel and told that their jobs had been re-contracted to another service subcontractor.
Management explained they could reapply, but one look at the new contracts was eye-opening. It wasn’t just that their existing conditions had been stripped, or that the new contracts contained nightmarish clauses – including one in which management could oblige them into medical or psychiatric treatments, at their own expense – they were also being told they could come back to work at jobs they’d been doing for years if they accepted pay cuts of up to 65%. They said no. Now, they’re here.
But the injunction can’t apply to everyone, and allies of the workers have parked a truck laden with megaphones outside the gates. Every 15 minutes, a guy called Steve bellows into the sound system: “Shame ... Shame ... Shame...!” towards the factory at a volume you can feel through your feet. Every hour, he plays the soundtrack of Charlie Chaplin’s famous speech in defence of equality from The Great Dictator. Chaplin’s inspirational tone is encouraging among the gloom, because otherwise the scene on the street outside CUB is akin to a newsreel from Thatcher-era Britain with only the addition of some mobile phones.
Also in the protest tent is Harry, who’s 20 and only halfway through a fitting apprenticeship that he doesn’t know how he will complete if he can’t get back to work soon. Tom, Huey and Vaughan are aged between 23-50, with 21 years at the factory between them. There’s another guy I don’t get to talk to, because he’s on the phone to his partner – their kid’s had an accident and been taken to hospital. You can see in the stiffness of his movements and hear in snatches of his voice the enhanced edge of frustration his own situation brings to dealing with the crisis at home.
Labour economist John Spoehr from the University of Adelaide says a third of manufacturing workers who lose their lobs in similar circumstances become long-term unemployed. There have been enough retrenchments around Australia in recent years for everyone to be worried for their economic future. When the job you’ve had for 34 years is re-offered to you with a 65% pay cut, it’s hard to believe there will be better jobs going elsewhere.
There aren’t. I’ve written earlier about the downturn in Australian manufacturing – a phenomenon occurring on these shores not for reasons of technological change, or of international uncompetitiveness, but for dovetailing causes of inactive government policy and corporate greed.
CUB brew the Carlton beers, Pure Blonde, VB and the Bulmer’s ciders – these are not products vulnerable to competition from downloads or an app, and CUB yet dominates the Australian beer market, owning five of the 10 biggest brands and, with VB, Australia’s single most popular. CUB’s international owner, the London-based SABMiller, is hardly facing tough times, either. It’s maintaining US$22bn a year in revenue as it prepares to sell itself to another beer giant, Anheuser-Busch InBev, in a deal worth US$104bn. It’s certainly not burdened with a heavy tax bill: last year, SABMiller miraculously generated zero taxable income in Australia, despite recording A$2bn in total earnings. That’s a lot of money not to pay tax on.
The Australian Manufacturing Workers Union is one of those fighting for the workers at Abbotsford; the national president of the AMWU, Andrew Dettmer, finds SABMiller’s actions “despicable”, and points to the global context of a growing problem. Says Dettmer:
SABMiller insist that its action in Abbotsford is technically legal because it has no direct contractual relationship with the maintenance crews laid off – it’s been with one subcontractor, and it is merely passing a contract to another who will simply assert the workers’ pay and conditions at its own discretion.
The argument the workers’ unions are making is that what’s taking place is a “transmission of business” manoeuvre, a corporate sleight-of-hand where a workforce is passed from one company to another to force new conditions on employees – like cutting their pay, or stripping their conditions – to improve the overall corporate master’s bottom line.
With the media stunts, grip-and-grins, policy blurts and corflute art of an election going on, it may be opportunistic timing for SABMiller to do this to a local workforce, but it would be a mistake for Australian voters to allow themselves to be distracted from its meaning. Weakening “transmission of business” protections has long been a habit of Liberal industrial relations policy, and as Malcolm Turnbull and Michaelia Cash travel the country flattering company owners as they spruik a “new economy” and their infamously unexplained “plan” for “jobs and growth”, one has to wonder if the kind of carefree cruelty dished out to workers at CUB is what they mean by an “agile” and “flexible” economy. Only last week, Griffin coal mine employees walked off the job when confronted with a 43% pay cut.
I took photos of Fletch and the others camped outside at CUB standing with a sign they’d made, reading “Are You Next?”. Before casting a vote, I’d recommend strongly people consider that thought.