ADDRESS TO IPAA BUDGET BREAKFAST
ADDRESS TO IPAA BUDGET BREAKFAST
CANBERRA, 15 MAY 2013
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Good morning Ladies and Gentlemen.
Welcome to Parliament’s Great Hall.
Welcome to that special time of year in Canberra.
The leaves have turned; many of you are devoting your weekends to raking them up.
And the nights are getting cooler.
It’s a sign, its Budget season.
And that’s what brings us here this morning.
Last night Treasurer Wayne Swan delivered the 2013-14 Budget. The Government’s 6th Budget.
This morning I’d like to talk to you about some of the key themes. The major decisions.
For some, that comes down to one number.
But I believe that the picture is much broader.
Over the past 5 years, our economy has emerged as one of the strongest in the developing world.
The Australian economy is now 13 per cent larger that it was when the Labor Government came to power – and we’ve grown 5 times faster than countries like the US and Germany.
We’ve seen around 950,000 jobs created in the same time – while around the rest of the world 28 million joined unemployment queues. This is to the credit of businesses like those represented in this room.
For the first time in the history of our Federation we have a AAA credit rating from the three major ratings agencies – on this we are in an elite group of eight other nations.
Government debt – which will peak at 11.4 per cent of GDP – is very small compared to the rest of the developed world. It is a small fraction of other western countries.
Unemployment is low.
Inflation is low.
Our economy is expected to outperform most advanced economies over the next two years.
As former Prime Minister Howard said on Friday:
“When the Prime Minister and the Treasurer and others tell you that the Australian economy is doing better than most – they are right,”
So I’m optimistic about Australia’s future.
But we are seeing some unprecedented circumstances in the global economy, combined with a large degree of structural change at home.
The unusual combination of a persistently high Australian dollar and lower terms of trade defies economic orthodoxies.
The insulating effect a falling currency would normally have on falling terms of trade has frayed.
Company profits and prices growth are both being put under pressure by this phenomenon – and this has obviously flowed through to lower tax revenues and subdued nominal GDP growth.
To put it simply – the country is working harder but earning less, commodity prices have fallen and the world has given us a pay cut, and the high dollar is making us feel the full force of this in our hip pockets.
Since last years’ budget, revenue has been revised down by $17 billion this year, bringing to total revenue write downs since 2008-09 to around $170 billion.
Since MYEFO last year, revenue looking out over the forwards has been revised down by $60 billion.
Despite this, yesterday’s Budget charts a course to surplus through $43 billion of responsible savings and natural increase in tax receipts.
Our savings deliver on our priorities – and mean that cumulatively the bottom line will be over $300 billion better off by 2020-21.
To govern is to choose, and the Budget handed down last night contains some big choices about our priorities as a Labor Government.
We have made the choice that after a number of years of major global turbulence we have had to take the short term as it comes and focus on the future.
This Budget is a watershed moment in our federation of states, our national story.
It delivers a decade long blueprint for the most profound piece of social justice policy since Medicare.
This is our chance to turn to the millions of Australians with disabilities and their carers that face daily struggles and say to them `your country will not leave you to fight each day alone`.
We see you. You have worth. And with a bit of help from your people, your society, your tribe, there is a chance things can change.
It is in this Budget that Australia undertakes to give every child – from Dandenong to Double Bay, be they first or fifteenth generation Australian – a greater commitment from their country towards their education.
We all know our kids are going to do remarkable things. They’re the generation which is going to put a person on Mars, and 20 per cent of the jobs they’re going to do haven’t been invented yet.
We owe it to them all to give them the opportunities they deserve to become all that they want to be.
They need our love – which they’ll always have and always hold for us, despite the grunts you might get from your teenagers.
But they also need an education system which sets them up for our bright, exciting and uncertain future.
This Budget maps the next decade of this system.
To capture the opportunity presented to our nation by the Asian century we have to invest in our people and our economy.
That’s why the Budget is focussed on building a stronger economy, a smarter nation, and a fairer society.
Embracing change, equipping Australians to manage change, whilst always supporting those who fall off the pace.
We know that you have to invest in the enablers of growth, in the productive capacity of the economy, in order to generate wealth.
After more than a decade of neglect, we’ve made significant inroads into the nation’s infrastructure backlog.
Labor has doubled annual Federal infrastructure spending from $141 to $269 per Australian.
The Budget makes a further significant commitment to putting right the decade of underinvestment prior to coming to office and begins building for our future.
Making the big investments in the economic drivers – not based on the margin of the electorate but in the benefit to the nation.
We‘re building on our massive $36 billion investment in road, rail and ports with a further $24 billion of investment in the next wave of nation building infrastructure.
We’re funding the missing links, and starting the investments in the transformational infrastructure needed in our biggest cities to ensure they will be able to meet the challenges of the future.
These investments matter to all of us.
There is a major cost to our economy of lost opportunities if we don’t get the capacity in place.
If we wait to invest, till the time is better, we put at risk the needs of our economy now and into the future.
The costs of congestion are estimated to reach $20 billion per annum by the end of this decade if we don’t invest, and invest now.
We know for business, this is opportunity lost.
You can’t sell when you’re stuck in traffic, you can’t grow if you can’t meet clients’ needs.
Businesses also lose on another front.
You need people to grow.
For families time commuting is time lost investing in your children.
Time lost connecting with them and with the community.
Investments that yield fruits for businesses, families, communities, the nation.
Businesses know that their greatest resource is their people.
Without skilled workers Australia can’t compete.
Now, and especially in the future.
You need a smart nation in order to have a truly strong economy.
We should be making our own luck, not digging it up.
We already earn far more as a nation mining what’s inside our heads than what’s under our feet.
That’s why I’ve been saying the future of Australia is a good job.
Every challenge and opportunity we face as a nation – the re-emergence of Asia, the easing of the mining boom, the digital economy – will come down to our people.
And the three big things I’ve discussed today are all about unlocking and improving the productive capacity of our people.
Getting our kids ready for the future.
Giving Australians with disability and their carers the right to an ordinary life – by helping them participate more fully in the economy and society.
And undertaking the nation building, job creating infrastructure projects.
We could face the current circumstances on the revenue side and shy away from our obligations, to shrink our ambitions.
That is not the Government’s choice, that’s not the Australian way.
To build a strong economy you need to invest in its capacity.
You don’t cut your way to prosperity.
You need to summon the courage to make the choice to grow our economy, to advance our nation.
So we’ve taken the hit to revenues, and to strengthen our economy in the future we are investing in making our economy stronger.
Investments in the foundations to create prosperity, investments in ensuring that opportunity can be accessed by as many people, as many ideas, as possible.
That’s what we’ve done in this Budget.
That’s what we do as a Government.
That’s what we’ve done for 125 years as a Labor Party.
These are our choices – and we’re extremely proud of them.
I thank you.
The Superannuation (Excess Concessional Contributions Tax) Amendment (DisabilityCare Australia) Bill 2013
SECOND READING SPEECH
The Superannuation (Excess Concessional Contributions Tax) Amendment (DisabilityCare Australia) Bill 2013
15 MAY 2013
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
The Superannuation (Excess Concessional Contributions Tax) Amendment (DisabilityCare Australia) Bill 2013 is part of a package of measures increasing the Medicare levy by half a percentage point.
It is an honour to speak to this bill and to support it. At the outset, I should acknowledge that this is part of a team of bills, and I acknowledge the work of the Prime Minister, the Treasurer, Minister Macklin and Minister McLucas and the people with disabilities and their advocates, who have worked so hard to get us to this point.
It is an honour to speak to this bill because to do so we recognise the story that so many Australians are in. It is a long twilight struggle with numbers every evening and every morning that do not come up right. It is a struggle with the limits of love—how much money we have for its expression, its gifts, its pleasures, its family occasions.
It is a struggle every day, by inches, minutes, ill-chosen words, by guilty evasions, by things not said or said too late. It is a struggle that is fought by good people who have tried so hard in circumstances that are not their fault and have never been their fault—people that have been challenged and defeated by shafts of fate that are now and have always been beyond their control.
These bills have been a long time coming, but we recognise their story now and the burden of love it represents, and the sorrow and the pity, day in, day out, that consumes the lives of more than one million of our fellow Australians.
The increase in the Medicare levy will help fund DisabilityCare Australia, which I believe is the most profound piece of social justice and civil rights policy since Medicare.
This is a watershed moment in our federation of states, our national story. It is an opportunity to alter the course of the future for millions of Australians that find difficulty in maintaining a basic level of existence that many of us take for granted.
The importance, the urgency of this, should not be underestimated.
Once DisabilityCare becomes a reality, we will never look back.
We will never go back to a time, a truly primitive time, when people with disabilities and their carers had to shoulder the burden and fill the gap while well-meaning legislators sat back and looked at their knuckles, and hoped the problem would fix itself.
This is a great cause to come before the House and the most important that I have had the privilege to work with a Labor team on.
This is our chance to turn to the more than 400,000 Australians, their families and their carers that face these daily struggles and say to them, ‘Your country will not leave you to fight each day alone.’
We see you. You have worth. And with a bit of help from your people, your society, your tribe, there is a chance things can change.
A better prosthetic may give new chances of work. The help of a specialist, one that was previously unaffordable under the private system, could make a breakthrough that can turn a life around.
These bills will change lives.
Change families.
Change the dimension of hope in every community.
No longer do we fill this place with empty rhetoric on this issue. We now put our money on the table. And we ask: what is the price of an ordinary life?
Under DisabilityCare, it does not matter if you were born with an impairment, or the circumstance in which you came to be the way you are.
What seems like such a basic concept, as old as the Good Samaritan, has taken a lot of work by a lot of people to come to action, fruition, to legislation in this place, on this historic day.
This really is a moment in our parliamentary history to relish and remember.
Equality, a Labor goal, is the simple goal of this nation-changing reform. I turn now to the details of the bill.
This bill contains consequential amendments as a result of the increase in the Medicare levy, contained in the Medicare Levy Amendment (DisabilityCare Australia) Bill 2013.
Contributions to superannuation are subject to a number of different caps, which vary depending on the age and retirement status of the person making the contribution, and on whether the contribution is made out of before- or after-tax income.
These caps exist to ensure that the amount of concessionally taxed superannuation benefits that a person may receive is sustainable and appropriately targeted, and designed for a person’s longevity.
The amount of a person’s pre-tax superannuation contribution that exceeds the concessional cap is currently taxed at a rate of 31.5 per cent. This is the sum of the top marginal personal tax rate of 45 per cent and the current Medicare levy of 1.5 per cent, less the general rate of 15 per cent tax paid by most superannuation funds.
This bill will increase the rate at which tax on excess concessional contributions is payable.
From 1 July 2014, this rate will increase by half a percentage point to 32 per cent, reflecting the increase in the Medicare levy.
These consequential amendments will help to ensure the integrity of the system.
Further details of the bill are set out in the explanatory memorandum for the package of bills.
I commend the bill to the House.
ACTU INVESTMENT FORUM
ACTU INVESTMENT FORUM
MELBOURNE, 10 MAY 2013
Ladies and gentlemen, I stand before you today a confessed superannuation nerd.
I am utterly excited by superannuation.
In my quieter moments, I often stop and think about the sheer size of our system.
It has occurred to me, if we amassed the entirety of Australia’s $1.5 trillion superannuation savings…
…you could build 12 stacks of $1 coins all the way to the moon
…those stacks would weigh the same as 135 of the US Navy’s largest aircraft carriers.
Our superannuation system is all around us.
It’s invested in the buildings we work in, the roads we drive on, the airports we travel from.
It’s in the wisdom of parents counselling children to save, to think long-term, as they wished they had done at their age.
Superannuation is something which is vitally important to each of us and all of us.
It makes possible the enjoyment of the best Australia can provide.
Our prosperity as a nation depends upon the personal financial prosperity of each of us as individuals.
Our success is the result of our own abilities and efforts.
And proper preparation is the key to that success.
I believe I find myself in the good company of fellow superannuation nerds this afternoon.
You know, as I know, just how remarkable our superannuation system is, and how it will become more remarkable in the future.
So I want to talk to you today about what I believe is an important reform the Gillard Government is pursuing to safeguard superannuation, and inject greater confidence, certainty and transparency in the system.
At every step of the way – from its creation, and its growth – it’s been Labor and the union movement making progress.
It’s a matter of record and a matter of fact that superannuation, from its birth and throughout its life, has been opposed every step of the way by the Liberal Party.
Indeed it’s an oft forgotten fact that John Howard went to the 1996 election promising to match Keating’s promise to increase superannuation to 15 per cent – only to break this promise in government.
A full 6 per cent of national income lost forever to capital markets, to the savings pool, and to millions of retirees.
With superannuation, as with every issue the Conservatives approach, it’s the ideological cart leading the policy horse.
The idea of ordinary working people having a shared stake in a pool of national wealth the size of our economy is an anathema to them.
Indeed only the Labor Party could have ever convinced working people to forgo 3, then 9 and now 12 per cent of their income for retirement.
So it was Labor and the union movement which built and nurtured superannuation – against sometimes fierce, often ideologically driven resistance.
And the resistance from the Conservatives to superannuation is still with us today.
They are campaigning on a promise to re-introduce a 15 per cent tax on the contributions of 3.6 million part-time and low-paid Australian workers earning less than $37,000. 2.2 million of these workers are women.
The Leader of the Opposition has indicated his opposition to the package of measured reforms the Government announced recently, including lifting concessional caps for people 60 and over this year and 50 and over from next year.
The same package includes making some common sense changes to the Costello Excess Contributions tax arrangements.
And it will forever be recorded in Hansard that Tony Abbott and every single one of his colleagues voted against increasing universal superannuation to 12 per cent.
I make these points to remind you that in the quarter century of superannuation in Australia, only the Labor Party and the labour movement have been in its corner.
25 years ago, Paul Keating and Bill Kelty were looking generations ahead.
I can assure you that this Government, led by Prime Minister Gillard, is doing the same today.
Yesterday I released a discussion paper seeking views from industry and the community more broadly about the eventual establishment of a Council of Superannuation Custodians whose task will be to advise on whether any proposed changes to Australia’s superannuation system are consistent with an agreed Charter of Superannuation Adequacy and Sustainability.
The Council itself would be an impartial, expert and apolitical body that is able to act as the stewards of the superannuation system, reporting to Parliament on its sustainability and its prospects for attaining the vision the nation has for it.
The proposal does not take decisions about superannuation from the Parliament, in the way the Reserve Bank now does over interest rates.
But the broad principle of protecting the collective wealth of the Australian people from short-term political considerations, by putting it under the stewardship of a neutral Council that people can trust, is similar.
That’s why I think of the Council and its Charter broadly as a ‘reserve bank for super’—helping the parliament make decisions about super calmly and apolitically in the way that the Reserve Bank makes decisions about interest rates calmly and apolitically.
These reforms will create a greater burden of proof for changes to superannuation; will make the impact of any changes more transparent.
To get the right answers, the discussion paper asks not just industry players but every Australian with an interest in the subject to give us their carefully considered views about what the exact powers of the Custodians should be, and what the exact principles of the Charter should be.
It asks, for instance:
- Which objectives are the most important in setting retirement incomes policy, and how can they best be pursued?
- Which restrictions can be placed on change to promote certainty?
- What are the right benchmarks for measuring the success of the superannuation system?
- What principles would best support fairness in the distribution of government assistance for retirement incomes?
- And what limits on the costs of government assistance might this lead to?
- How important is minimising the complexity of legislation and regulation compared to these other objectives?
The discussion paper also asks people about what the powers, independence and legislative standing of the Council of Superannuation Custodians should be.
Obviously not all of these questions will be of immediate interest to everyday Australians. But others will be—like what standard of retirement they think is adequate and how much money they think they will need.
The Custodians and the Charter were part of the package of reforms that the Treasurer and I announced recently.
And criticisms were raised at the time that this had more to do with circling the wagons around superannuation – that it was about the upcoming Budget; that it was about opinion polls.
Of course it is concerning that the Liberal Party have failed to accept that superannuation is now a foundation stone of our lives and our economy
I think people are right to be worried given the Liberal Party’s record on superannuation; opposed its creation, opposed every increase and now want to rip away $4 billion from the super accounts of low income earners.
But when I think about superannuation, I’m not thinking about the next Budget, the 24-news cycle, next week’s Newspoll, or the September election.
I’m thinking about the next 20, 30 or 40 years.
I’m thinking about my kids, and their working lives, and their retirement.
I’m thinking about the fact that in 25 years Australia’s superannuation pool will grow to $6 trillion, which will be almost twice the size of our GDP.
That’s why the Charter and the Custodians are important – because they require all future governments, Labor or Liberal, to implement superannuation policies which are in the long-term national interest.
Not solving short-term political problems or chasing ideology.
I believe proper preparation of ideas is always the key to their success.
The Charter and Custodians are policies which require a long-run up, they can’t be rushed, but by the same token I would like to have these ideas well progressed before the election in September.
I encourage views from my fellow superannuation nerds in this room.
I also encourage your advocacy to make the ideas of the Charter and Council inevitable and bi-partisan.
I thank you.
ADDRESS TO THE QUEENSLAND MEDIA CLUB
THE FUTURE OF SUPER
Introduction
Ladies and gentlemen, sometimes democracy is capable of achieving great things.
Witness last week and the establishment of a national disability insurance scheme – DisabilityCare, the evolution of an idea whose time has come.
An idea with the potential to end the virtual exile of people with disability from their own communities, that midnight anxiety of an ageing parent wondering who is going to look after their beautiful adult child with a disability when they no longer can.
There are sensible biblical injunctions against pride, but if ever there is a moment for Australians to be proud of their democracy, this is it.
And I have to tell you, I’m feeling particularly proud of being an Australian and a member of the Australian Labor Party right now.
What’s the lesson we should take from this wonderful national achievement?
It’s that ideas are powerful.
Especially when they are backed by belief and courage.
Just five years ago a national disability insurance scheme was just an idea and a dream.
A seemingly impossible idea.
A dream that didn’t have a hope.
Then a group of incredibly courageous and determined parents and advocates asked me to take their cause to Canberra, which I did.
Now it’s about to become a law.
It was the same with superannuation thirty years ago.
Back in the 1980s we just accepted that if you wore a suit you got superannuation, and if you wore overalls you got the pension.
Just like we recently accepted that if you had a heart attack you got Medicare, but if you had a profound disability you got charity.
We just couldn’t see that it didn’t have to be that way.
Then along came Paul Keating and Bill Kelty, with the idea that superannuation should be a right for everyone.
The idea that people on average wages or on two, three times average wages should not have to work hard and retire poor.
History now records that their idea became a law too.
It took a lot of fight to get the Superannuation Guarantee on the statute books.
But it happened.
And as a result we now have one of the best retirement systems in the world.
One which stands alongside the minimum wage, the Aged Pension, Medicare and now DisabilityCare as one of the five pillars of Australian social democracy.
Superannuation makes possible the enjoyment of the best that Australia can provide.
But we need to take superannuation forward, not backwards, now.
We need to make superannuation even stronger and more resilient, now.
So today I want to talk to you about another idea—an idea that will remove our superannuation system from the maelstrom of electoral politics and empower ownership of superannuation policy to the people it was designed to benefit.
How do we protect superannuation and ensure it meets the needs of people for a decent retirement and the needs of the country for a long-term investment capital?
I believe the answer lies in creating of a Charter of Superannuation Adequacy, overseen by a 100 per cent a-political Council of Superannuation Custodians who will ensure superannuation policy is treated as a long-term savings vehicle.
To ensure that investors will have a consistent regime in order to plan effectively for their retirement over a 20, 30, 40 year period.
And today I want to start a national conversation about lifting superannuation above politics, and how we should do that.
Removing super from the political arena
The time has come to remove superannuation from the realm of contested politics and look generations ahead.
The reasons for this are simple.
Superannuation is a retirement savings right for all Australians.
Our prosperity as a nation depends upon the personal financial prosperity of each of us as individuals.
Our success is the result of our own abilities and efforts.
The more transparent, accountable and democratic superannuation is, the better the system will be and the more enshrined it will be as an inalienable entitlement.
While it’s true public policy must always be able to respond to changing economic and other circumstances, when it comes to super too much change too quickly risks diminishing public confidence.
And the sheer scale of moneys involved—and their importance to Australian families and our economy—means that a very, very high burden of proof in decision-making should apply.
We in public life, regardless of political persuasion, simply owe it to every Australian to try harder and do better on this—because the Australian people have so much at stake.
Super—about bringing Australians together
Those of you who know me know that my support for superannuation is unwavering.
Superannuation is typically Australia—pragmatic, egalitarian, with a touch of vision.
To me, the great genius of super lies in the way it has brought together previously un-reconciled aspects of our nation.
Think about it.
In past times, the typical way to lift living standards for working Australians was to make it a fight between capital and labour.
A win-lose contest.
But in super, we have found a way of raising the retirement income and living standards of millions of ordinary Australians not by setting them against capital, but by encourage them to accumulate capital through compulsory savings.
That’s a win-win for everyone.
And the process of creating superannuation was itself a great example of bringing labour and capital together.
It’s my firm belief that if we can once again harness the unifying spirit that brought superannuation about 25 years ago, we can master our economic destiny of the next 25 and 50 years.
So let’s look back at that moment in our history.
Super – the history
Back in the early 1980s, the great majority of Australians still did not have superannuation and little or no access to the generous superannuation tax provisions then available.
Businesspeople, public servants and very few others were its sole beneficiaries.
Looking back now, it seems an extraordinary inequity.
Looking back now, it seems as outmoded as ashtrays in cars, black and white TVs and rotary dial telephones.
But Paul Keating and Bill Kelty then pursued an opportunity to achieve the long-range egalitarian objectives of the Labor movement and promote the national interest, and do so in a way that assisted the needs of the economy and business.
They looked beyond the budget cycle to another socio-economic era altogether.
In the Superannuation Guarantee they found a way to provide reward for economic growth without raising inflation and unemployment.
Their model was both simple and fair, with three strong features:
- First, an aged pension as a basic living payment means tested for all
- Second, mandated superannuation for those earning income, with the eventual aim of providing all contributors with 70 per cent of their pre-retirement income.
- And third, voluntary savings for those with means, aided by concessional taxation within a reasonable benefit limit.
This represented an extraordinary step forward in retirement living standards and creation of wealth in Australia.
As Keating recognised, the previous pension system had made too much of people’s expected retirement income hostage to the political realities of the day.
He grasped the crucial moral issue: that the right to a decent retirement should not depend on the electoral cycle, governmental whim and Treasury doctrine.
He saw that superannuation represented the possibility of decoupling the social right to a decent retirement from the risks associated with short term politics.
And he said superannuation would ‘make Australia a more equal place, a more egalitarian place, and hence, a more cohesive and happier place.’
How right he was.
And how great his legacy is.
In the decade after the introduction of the Superannuation Guarantee in 1992, the steady rise of superannuation contributions to nine per cent coincided with rising profit ratios and rising economic growth.
The superannuation increases were deferred wages growth paid for by increases in the productive capacity of enterprises and supported by concessional taxation, dividend imputation and compound interest.
And it created a truly massive pool of capital—now at $1.5 trillion and expected to rise to reach $6 trillion over the next 25 years—which has assisted investment and wealth creation ever since.
Our super system now comprises the fourth largest pool of privately managed funds anywhere in the world.
One that will continue to help insulate us from global economic shocks well into the future.
That’s an extraordinary achievement.
Labor did it
Labor is justifiably proud of Australia’s superannuation system.
We conceived it.
We created it.
We nurtured it.
Then—maddeningly—we had to stand back and watch as the system was kept in suspended animation from 1996 to 2007.
Denying our nation further savings and investment and jobs.
It took a Labor Government to invent super and convince ordinary workers to forego 9 per cent of wages.
And it’s going to take a Labor Government to complete super by elevating it, ensuring independent custodians operating in the best interests of the people are able to test policies against the long term core values of superannuation.
Only Labor loves the system enough to take the generational horizon approach.
Preparing the system for new challenges
Now the system must be prepared for new challenges, most notably the fact that people are living longer and that the baby boom generation is retiring, reducing the ratio of working to non-working people.
Today there are fifty of us in work for every ten retirees.
By 2050 it will be 27 in work for every ten retirees.
The number of us aged over 65 will increase from 3 million to over eight million.
We must start planning for this right now.
That’s what this proposal today will enable us to do.
Current policy settings are the right ones
The right responses are already being made.
And we believe our current policy settings are making the system better, stronger and more resilient.
The increase to the Superannuation Guarantee will begin this July when the first modest quarter-per-cent rise kicks in.
9.25 per cent will be followed by 9.5 per cent and so on until the rate reached 12 per cent in 2019.
And we must go to 12 per cent. We must ignore the doubters and naysayers who say stop or defer the increase. We cannot repeat earlier mistakes by leaving the system jammed.
Also, the continuation of the Low Income Superannuation Contribution is ensuring that the 3.6 million Australians who earn below $37 000 a year are able to continue to save tax free.
We are also decreasing the cost of fees and charges.
This is crucial—because for superannuation to truly work, everyone must contribute and benefit.
It has to be democratic.
It also has to be focused on its ultimate aim—which is to encourage and reward Australians to invest for a comfortable retirement.
That’s why other recently announced changes to superannuation investment incentives have been necessary.
Yes, superannuation investment should be incentivised to save for retirement—but it cannot provide an open-ended set of tax concessions for Australia’s highest income earners.
The fact is, beyond a certain point people no longer need a 100 per cent taxpayer subsidised concession to invest in super, and this must be recognised in the way the system works.
And that’s why correcting the anomaly of open-ended concessions experiment that was introduced in 2007.
By strengthening the system’s fairness, we benefit everyone and the nation.
Labor is moving the system to 12 per cent.
And we’ve settled on the right tax treatment.
So certainly we do not see the need for any further tax treatment amendments beyond what have been announced.
A new forum to plan for the future of super
But it is time to look even further ahead and secure the system’s long-term health.
Planning for the next 20, 30, 50 years is underway and must continue.
And this raises the question: what is the best forum in which to conduct this planning?
My very strong view is that it must not be conducted in the gladiatorial arena of electoral politics. Superannuation should be bipartisan.
The last thing—the very last thing—we need is for decisions to be made to score ideological points.
For instance, the role of equal representation between employer and employee representatives in industry superannuation funds must not put those particular funds in the firing line of any proposed proxy war on unions.
We have given APRA the power to look through the governance of all superannuation funds.
We should leave the independent regulator to independently regulate.
Equal rules must apply to all funds, because the collateral damage of any proxy war will be the retirement savings of millions of our citizens.
To put it plainly, superannuation now comprises the biggest asset Australians have apart from the family home, and that means decisions about super must not only be above political considerations, they must be seen to be above political considerations.
Ideology especially must play no part.
The Council and the Charter
The two policies addressed in the discussion paper we are launching today have been designed with this challenge in mind.
The broad proposal is for the eventual establishment of a Council of Superannuation Custodians whose task will be to advise on whether any proposed changes to Australia’s superannuation system by the government of the day are consistent with an agreed Charter of Superannuation Adequacy and Sustainability.
The Council itself would be an impartial, expert and apolitical body that is able to act as the stewards of the superannuation system, reporting to parliament on its sustainability and its prospects for attaining the vision the nation has for it.
The proposal does not take decisions about superannuation away from the Parliament, in the way the Reserve bank now does over interest rates.
But the broad principle of protecting the collective wealth of the Australian people by putting it under the stewardship of a neutral Council that people can trust, is similar.
That’s why I characterise the Council and its Charter broadly as a ‘reserve bank for super’—helping the parliament make decisions about super calmly and apolitically in the way that the Reserve Bank makes decisions about interest rates calmly and apolitically.
And the discussion paper being released today provides an opportunity for all Australians to have a say in the design of the Superannuation Charter and the powers of the Council of Custodians.
The discussion paper also asks people about what the powers, independence and legislative standing of the Council of Superannuation Custodians should be.
Importantly, it asks them what standard of retirement they think is adequate and how much money they think they will need.
Some will want enough to holiday in Paris.
While others will be happy with a caravan by the beach and a new fishing rod.
Personally, I think that the goal of 70 per cent of pre-retirement income is a good target to aim for.
But whatever the percentage or dollar amount is, people must have their say, because in a democracy, it is vital that we are all involved in such fundamental and far-reaching issues.
Proper preparation of ideas is always the key to their success.
I envisage the Charter group will consult before making recommendations.
This can be done in a reasonable timeframe.
I fundamentally believe that if you don’t rush good public policy – if you take time – there is more likelihood of attracting consent and consensus.
Any other approach creates antagonism.
I would like to get this moving well before the election so good ideas do not get tangled up in the battlefield of a federal election.
I want this idea to be alive now because I believe this is what the electorate wants.
The days of bickering and partisanship must stop – we must press on to create the greatest savings system in the world – vested in individuals not government funds, second in aggregate terms globally as well.
Conclusion
One thing is for certain: our superannuation system gives every Australian a direct stake in the big decisions about the economic future of the country.
It’s only right that we get passionate about it.
Emotion is sometimes beneficial.
That’s how we got DisabilityCare. People fought for it and formed an unprecedented unity of purpose.
But there are some issues where it is far better to keep emotions at bay.
To engage in quiet reflection.
To undertake deeply informed discussion.
Superannuation policy is one of them.
Our actions in superannuation will never be wiser than our thoughts.
Lifting superannuation out of adversarial politics won’t happen overnight.
Like all true long-term reforms, it will take time to execute properly.
It will need the development of consensus.
It must be accepted because it just makes sense.
It must seem inevitable – like a national scheme of disability insurance now seems to have always been inevitable.
So let’s make it inevitable.
Let’s make it bi-partisan too.
No going back – no looking back.
Let’s get the super industry, the Opposition and citizens with a super account behind this push to make our national system of retirement savings safe and secure.
Thank you
ADDRESS TO NATIONAL DAY OF MOURNING
ADDRESS TO NATIONAL DAY OF MOURNING
BRISBANE
24 APRIL 2013
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
One of privileges of being a parent and a husband is that special, amazing time of day when you come home from work.
You open the gate, walk up the path and unlock the door.
And you’re home.
There are your kids.
The little 3 year olds who scream out daddy and hug you, primary school kids running around, the teenagers who just grunt and barely lift their head from the screen.
Your wife – who smiles at you provided you’re in the good books.
The dog – definitely, unequivocally always happy to see you.
This is what life is all about.
But this year, there will be hundreds of Australian houses, Australian families, Australian kids for whom the terrible phone call or knock at the door will be unbearable, unreplaceable, never get over news that someone you love – mother, father, husband, wife, brother, sister, son, daughter – is gone.
You will never get the chance to say goodbye
…I’ll miss you
…I love you
Ever again.
Tomorrow at dawn, we will begin the great process of mourning, and praising, young men who never got back to their farms and their wives and their parents, from Gallipoli, or Darwin, or Singapore, or Alamein, or Long Tan, or Kapyeong, or the Somme, who made, while not meaning to, or planning to, the ultimate sacrifice to preserve, they hoped, their way of life and their freedom.
And there are other young men, too, volunteers like the Anzacs, who in Kandahar or Tarin Kowt, have in this past week been under fire for a similar cause, the freedom and safely of democrats, and those thirty-four who never came back to their towns, and their wives, and the green, green grass of home, as heroes named and remembered.
We always remember the dead. We mourn them, we venerate them, we write them songs and poems, and pray for their surviving families as we should.
It is part of the way we are as a tribe and a national family, bereaved in faraway places of our most promising sons and daughters in battles not always our own, and give thanks to these young strangers whom we never knew in life and owe so much.
They put themselves in harm’s way, always for their mates; and the harm came.
And every ANZAC Day, we re-imbibe and re-experience the sad glory of the casualties of war.
There is less acclaim, however, less memorial sculpture and rolls of honour for others who have died at work.
People who honour their contract of employment – productive, profitable, fair dinkum workers, people who through no fault of their own do not return home safely.
It is right to venerate our lost ones, as we do today and will do tomorrow.
But I believe that all too often workplace deaths have a pointlessness about them.
A sudden – often predictable – lining up of a series of small daily hazards, when a bunch of risks ‘gang up’ on someone, and a catastrophe erupts: electrocution, falling scaffolding, a foul and toxic mist or fume in a confined space, a flying piece of machinery, an unguarded pinch point in a conveyor belt, the unguarded spinning hammers of a crusher
It’s the toss of a coin about which gold miner will work the tele-handler the day of the fatal rock fall.
Forty-five Australians have been killed at work already this year.
These deaths are not heroic – they’re tragic, they’re pointless and painfully predictable in too many cases.
The average age of a worker who is killed on the job is thirty-seven.
Thirty-seven: the age Albert Einstein published his theory of relativity and changed the world.
Imagine what our nation has lost through the premature deaths of our fellow Australians.
Imagine the unfinished business of love and family, of parenting and Christmas lunches, and grandchildren never met.
I have witnessed firsthand the guilt and grief, anger and despair felt by workmates, colleagues and bosses.
I’ve stood in hospital wards looked at the burns and amputations of people just like you and me.
I’ve visited grieving mothers and fathers, wives and husbands, trying to recapture the stories of their loved one who left for work and never came home.
But it is impossible to give these deaths meaning.
Because we know they are preventable. They are not accidents.
Let me repeat this: by far most deaths and serious injuries are predictable safety failures.
It’s not a systems’ failure or risk assessment failure, or hazard identification failure…and all those other handsome words without tears.
It is the failure that springs as a readymade monster from the knowing tolerance of small daily hazards at the daily tasks.
Ask workers anywhere, they’ll tell you.
Too many Australians have died on the job because of what might appear minor health and safety failures:
Insufficient or totally inadequate guarding on moving parts of machines
Entry into dangerous confined spaces
The lack of proper lights and effective reverse alarms on mobile plant
Dangerous equipment, and unstable vehicles like quad bikes, now the worst killer on farms.
Absent scaffolding
Untrained and unsupervised use of hazardous chemicals.
Toxic workplace bullying
Exposure to lung-killing asbestos fibres.
And, I must add, how many workers are killed after long term diseases as a result of chemicals, pesticides, years of stress and depression?
These are the daily battles that the labor movement know all too well.
It’s the labor movement who say close enough is never good enough for workplace health and safety.
It’s the labor movement that fight the cases of unfairness, compensation, rehabilitation and, constantly struggle for improvements in health and safety standards.
It’s always the labor movement who are there to console and support the families who have lost a loved one.
To those who seek to destroy the labor movement, who say that we’ve had our day; that our work is done, that we are history…
…go and tell that to the seriously injured workers in chronic pain, who can’t even lift up their kids
…go and tell that to the families and mates of dead workers.
…go and tell that to victims of workplace bullyinging.
…go and tell that to new mums returning to work who are discriminated against.
…go and tell that to the men and women who have to fight and struggle with companies like James Hardie to get the care they need and deserve.
To say the labor movement’s work is done is to say that 300 of our fellow Australians dying at work is acceptable, that the thousands of injuries are fine, that the fact that some worker has bones broken nearly every hour of the working day, somewhere in Australia, is acceptable.
The labor movement and these workers provide the eyes and ears at work, they see and experience the daily hazards, not the paperwork, the actual hazards. They need to be heard,
It’s one thing to weep almost tears of blood over killed workers, to treat them as lost treasures when we bury them.
And I’ve seen workers and their employers weep in such circumstances. Of course you would!
But these workers are treasures when they are still alive? What about keeping an eye on daily hazards and doing something about them at the task, not in the responsibility avoiding paperwork?
I take the opportunity on this memorial day to say to management teams: forget the big canvasses and the fancy words and the fancy theories.
Begin by not tolerating small daily hazards, that’s how this long journey starts, by everyone knowing that even small safety failures will not be tolerated at any workplace.
Foster and nurture a demonstrable intolerance to small daily hazards.
This is doable, this is not expensive, there is no excuse for not doing it.
You don’t need any extra training or extra paper work.
You need to understand what it is to have a sense of dignity at work. To understand what workers mean when they say, “The safety program here is in good hands. Remember this: IN GOOD HANDS. Where trust and respect live.
To say workplace injuries are the price we pay for profit is ignorant and uncivilised.
Well that’s not the Australia I know and love. And that’s not the Australia YOU know and love.
It’s not the Queensland we know and love.
We’re better than that, and we must stand as one – employees and employers - and say we won’t stop this fight until every Australian who leaves for work comes home safe and in good health, and satisfied with a good day’s work.
I thank you.
Mr Shorten’s Media Contact: Jessica Lindell 0408 642 804
ADDRESS TO NATIONAL DAY OF MOURNING
ADDRESS TO NATIONAL DAY OF MOURNING
BRISBANE
24 APRIL 2013
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
One of privileges of being a parent and a husband is that special, amazing time of day when you come home from work.
You open the gate, walk up the path and unlock the door.
And you’re home.
There are your kids.
The little 3 year olds who scream out daddy and hug you, primary school kids running around, the teenagers who just grunt and barely lift their head from the screen.
Your wife – who smiles at you provided you’re in the good books.
The dog – definitely, unequivocally always happy to see you.
This is what life is all about.
But this year, there will be hundreds of Australian houses, Australian families, Australian kids for whom the terrible phone call or knock at the door will be unbearable, unreplaceable, never get over news that someone you love – mother, father, husband, wife, brother, sister, son, daughter – is gone.
You will never get the chance to say goodbye
…I’ll miss you
…I love you
Ever again.
Tomorrow at dawn, we will begin the great process of mourning, and praising, young men who never got back to their farms and their wives and their parents, from Gallipoli, or Darwin, or Singapore, or Alamein, or Long Tan, or Kapyeong, or the Somme, who made, while not meaning to, or planning to, the ultimate sacrifice to preserve, they hoped, their way of life and their freedom.
And there are other young men, too, volunteers like the Anzacs, who in Kandahar or Tarin Kowt, have in this past week been under fire for a similar cause, the freedom and safely of democrats, and those thirty-four who never came back to their towns, and their wives, and the green, green grass of home, as heroes named and remembered.
We always remember the dead. We mourn them, we venerate them, we write them songs and poems, and pray for their surviving families as we should.
It is part of the way we are as a tribe and a national family, bereaved in faraway places of our most promising sons and daughters in battles not always our own, and give thanks to these young strangers whom we never knew in life and owe so much.
They put themselves in harm’s way, always for their mates; and the harm came.
And every ANZAC Day, we re-imbibe and re-experience the sad glory of the casualties of war.
There is less acclaim, however, less memorial sculpture and rolls of honour for others who have died at work.
People who honour their contract of employment – productive, profitable, fair dinkum workers, people who through no fault of their own do not return home safely.
It is right to venerate our lost ones, as we do today and will do tomorrow.
But I believe that all too often workplace deaths have a pointlessness about them.
A sudden – often predictable – lining up of a series of small daily hazards, when a bunch of risks ‘gang up’ on someone, and a catastrophe erupts: electrocution, falling scaffolding, a foul and toxic mist or fume in a confined space, a flying piece of machinery, an unguarded pinch point in a conveyor belt, the unguarded spinning hammers of a crusher
It’s the toss of a coin about which gold miner will work the tele-handler the day of the fatal rock fall.
Forty-five Australians have been killed at work already this year.
These deaths are not heroic – they’re tragic, they’re pointless and painfully predictable in too many cases.
The average age of a worker who is killed on the job is thirty-seven.
Thirty-seven: the age Albert Einstein published his theory of relativity and changed the world.
Imagine what our nation has lost through the premature deaths of our fellow Australians.
Imagine the unfinished business of love and family, of parenting and Christmas lunches, and grandchildren never met.
I have witnessed firsthand the guilt and grief, anger and despair felt by workmates, colleagues and bosses.
I’ve stood in hospital wards looked at the burns and amputations of people just like you and me.
I’ve visited grieving mothers and fathers, wives and husbands, trying to recapture the stories of their loved one who left for work and never came home.
But it is impossible to give these deaths meaning.
Because we know they are preventable. They are not accidents.
Let me repeat this: by far most deaths and serious injuries are predictable safety failures.
It’s not a systems’ failure or risk assessment failure, or hazard identification failure…and all those other handsome words without tears.
It is the failure that springs as a readymade monster from the knowing tolerance of small daily hazards at the daily tasks.
Ask workers anywhere, they’ll tell you.
Too many Australians have died on the job because of what might appear minor health and safety failures:
Insufficient or totally inadequate guarding on moving parts of machines
Entry into dangerous confined spaces
The lack of proper lights and effective reverse alarms on mobile plant
Dangerous equipment, and unstable vehicles like quad bikes, now the worst killer on farms.
Absent scaffolding
Untrained and unsupervised use of hazardous chemicals.
Toxic workplace bullying
Exposure to lung-killing asbestos fibres.
And, I must add, how many workers are killed after long term diseases as a result of chemicals, pesticides, years of stress and depression?
These are the daily battles that the labor movement know all too well.
It’s the labor movement who say close enough is never good enough for workplace health and safety.
It’s the labor movement that fight the cases of unfairness, compensation, rehabilitation and, constantly struggle for improvements in health and safety standards.
It’s always the labor movement who are there to console and support the families who have lost a loved one.
To those who seek to destroy the labor movement, who say that we’ve had our day; that our work is done, that we are history…
…go and tell that to the seriously injured workers in chronic pain, who can’t even lift up their kids
…go and tell that to the families and mates of dead workers.
…go and tell that to victims of workplace bullyinging.
…go and tell that to new mums returning to work who are discriminated against.
…go and tell that to the men and women who have to fight and struggle with companies like James Hardie to get the care they need and deserve.
To say the labor movement’s work is done is to say that 300 of our fellow Australians dying at work is acceptable, that the thousands of injuries are fine, that the fact that some worker has bones broken nearly every hour of the working day, somewhere in Australia, is acceptable.
The labor movement and these workers provide the eyes and ears at work, they see and experience the daily hazards, not the paperwork, the actual hazards. They need to be heard,
It’s one thing to weep almost tears of blood over killed workers, to treat them as lost treasures when we bury them.
And I’ve seen workers and their employers weep in such circumstances. Of course you would!
But these workers are treasures when they are still alive? What about keeping an eye on daily hazards and doing something about them at the task, not in the responsibility avoiding paperwork?
I take the opportunity on this memorial day to say to management teams: forget the big canvasses and the fancy words and the fancy theories.
Begin by not tolerating small daily hazards, that’s how this long journey starts, by everyone knowing that even small safety failures will not be tolerated at any workplace.
Foster and nurture a demonstrable intolerance to small daily hazards.
This is doable, this is not expensive, there is no excuse for not doing it.
You don’t need any extra training or extra paper work.
You need to understand what it is to have a sense of dignity at work. To understand what workers mean when they say, “The safety program here is in good hands. Remember this: IN GOOD HANDS. Where trust and respect live.
To say workplace injuries are the price we pay for profit is ignorant and uncivilised.
Well that’s not the Australia I know and love. And that’s not the Australia YOU know and love.
It’s not the Queensland we know and love.
We’re better than that, and we must stand as one – employees and employers - and say we won’t stop this fight until every Australian who leaves for work comes home safe and in good health, and satisfied with a good day’s work.
I thank you.
NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF CANADA FEDERAL CONFERENCE
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS OMITTED
New Democrats, it’s an honour to be with you today representing the Gillard Government and the Australian Labor Party.
Australia and Canada may lie at opposite ends of the globe, but we have much in common.
We were both colonies that became countries.
We are both democratic and multicultural.
We are both nations that need political leadership to plan for the next 20, 30, 40 years.
And Australian Labor and the NDP both represent working people.
The difference is that we’re in government – you’re in opposition.
Either way, everything is at stake for both of us.
And that’s what I want to do today – to give you an Australian perspective on what can be achieved if you win.
There’s an old saying in the Australian Labor Party: Only the impotent are pure.
That might sound cynical. It’s not. It’s pragmatic.
Those words were spoken by Gough Whitlam – one of the great leaders of the Australian Labor Party – the Prime Minister who saw what Medicare was doing in Canada and replicated it in Australia.
Whitlam said “only the impotent are pure” to a hostile ALP conference in 1967.
At the time, Labor had been out of power for a generation.
We were divided and we were more interested in fighting ourselves than anyone else.
Some elements of the Party were happier to lose and remain pure than win and accomplish reform.
Some didn’t want to win if they had to compromise.
Some in our movement would settle for nothing rather than power.
Therefore, that’s what millions of Australians had. Nothing.
Whitlam and his supporters wanted more.
They wanted to change the country – and they did.
The Labor Government I am a member of feels the same.
We were elected in 2007 with a burning desire to make a difference.
Since then,
We’ve kept Australia out of recession during the Global Financial Crisis, our economy has grown by 13 per cent plus since the GFC;
We’ve created 890,000 jobs, our unemployment rate 5.6 per cent;
We’ve boosted compulsory and universal superannuation pension payments from nine to 12 per cent of income for all employees;
We’ve started building an optic fibre National Broadband Network right around the country;
We’ve implemented a price on carbon pollution;
We have a record number of children completing year 12;
We’ve started rolling out a National Disability Insurance Scheme to ensure Australians with a disability have the support they need to reach their full potential;
We’ve increased our aged pension to $733 per fortnight;
We now have a minimum wage of $16.76 per hour Canadian;
We’re skilling hundreds of thousands of apprentices and trainees;
We’ve corrected past wrongs – apologising to Indigenous Australians, apologising to children forcibly adopted, and establishing a Royal Commission into child sexual abuse by the clergy and other institutions;
We repealed unfair labour laws;
We passed laws that promote collective bargaining;
We’re ensuring safe rates for long distance truck drivers;
We’ve delivered equal pay for tens of thousands of women working in predominantly feminised industries like the community and care sectors;
We’re working to remove asbestos from Australia by 2030;
We’re fighting for local jobs to go to locals first, ensuring temporary migrant labour is used to fill only legitimate vacancies and not reduce labour costs for multinational companies;
We’re aiming to provide 15 hours a week of pre-school for every 4 year old Australian child;
And we’ve delivered new school buildings in each of 10,000 Australian schools…..
… as I said, we’ve achieved a great deal.
We’ve made Australia fairer, stronger and more sustainable.
But, New Democrats, one of the challenges of being a progressive party is that you can never stand still.
There is always another baby being born.
There is always another child starting school.
There’s always another self-made small business person aspiring to do more.
There is always another man or woman who’s lost a job – or is looking to re-enter the workforce.
There’s always another older worker who’s looking to retire comfortably.
There’s always an ageing parent awake at midnight, anxious about who will look after their adult child with disability, when they no longer can.
And those people need the protection of a progressive party.
That’s why there is always so much more to do – so much more at stake.
That’s why, unlike the conservatives, we must never be satisfied.
For instance, the reforms our government has made since 2007 – whether it’s carbon pricing or the National Broadband Network or superannuation or the National Disability Insurance Scheme – will take years to work their way through the economy, the community, the environment.
In the meantime, those gains are at risk.
They’re at risk because our opponents would love nothing more than to …
turn back the clock on workplace rights,
pretend climate change doesn’t exist,
forget about the secure retirement of working men and women,
allow people with disability to be exiled as second class citizens in their own country.
Our opponents are not looking forward, but backwards. They’re fearful of the future. They want to pretend that things can stay as they are.
They cry out that we cannot compete with the rest of the world.
They’re not pure, but they’re not impotent, either.
They’re dangerous.
In Australia, our opponents have a single obsession.
They think the answer to all of Australia’s ills is to put an end to basic workplace protections – to go back to the law of the jungle.
They think demonising trade unions and deregulating labour laws is the only road to productivity growth.
In fact, they say the day of the trade union is over, that there is no longer a role in society for organised labour.
What they don’t appreciate is that modern unionists would seek cooperation at work in productive jobs, in profitable enterprises.
Modern unionists are committed to raising and educating their children, honouring their mortgage, paying their taxes, and building their communities.
What conservatives don’t understand is that, in the twenty-first century, people are the difference – our people are what make our homelands great.
They don’t understand that the workplaces of the future will be high skilled, high performing, co-operative enterprises where the productive capacity of individuals is recognised and nurtured.
Conservatives just don’t get it. They really don’t.
And that’s why progressive parties like ours must never stand still.
Must never be satisfied with the status quo.
Must always have an eye on a greater purpose.
And, New Democrats, for me, the greater purpose of progressive politics in the 21st century is employment.
Put it another way: the future is a good job.
Let me explain what I mean by that.
All the challenges we face – whether they are globalization or the skills race or the empowerment of workers and consumers – all of them come back to the brains and ability of our people.
Booms will come and go.
Minerals and commodities prices will eventually decline.
That’s why, to prosper in the 21st century, Australia – and, I suspect, Canada – needs a healthy, highly educated, creative workforce.
We need students and apprentices.
We need men and women who are encouraged to work – whether they are parents returning from maternal or paternal leave … or people with a disability … or are unemployed.
We need older workers not to be discouraged and discriminated from working.
We need women to be treated the same as men in our society.
And that’s why it’s vital to keep fighting for progress.
Because progressive politics is all about fairness and productivity – profitable businesses…..good jobs for working people … co-operation over conflict … on-the-job safety and equality … regular hours….some control of one’s tasks at work…..a secure retirement as a just reward for a lifetime of hard work.
Progressive politics is all about social justice – an educated and healthy and scientific nation where no one is shut out by disability or gender or disadvantage … where no one is left behind.
Progressive politics is all about fostering a diverse, creative multicultural society – where everyone’s a local … no matter whether they are first or fifteenth generation citizens …
Where it makes no difference whether you are Australian or Canadian by birth or choice.
Everyone is the same.
Everyone is equal.
Everyone is welcome.
Progressive politics is all about keeping our hard-wired DNA promise to our parents by leaving a better future to our children than we inherited.
New Democrats, the future is not an unknown.
We can predict the forces of the next 20, 30, 40 years.
The re-emergence of Asia as a world power,
The ageing of our societies,
The growth of service industries,
The exponential impact of the digital age
The march of women through institutions of power,
The absolute obligation of sustainability
The citizens of Australia and Canada are ahead of us.
They are already organising their lives to take advantage of the next 20, 30, 40 years.
They understand there’s no such thing as a job for life anymore, but several careers with constant learning and re-learning.
They understand the need for sustained prosperity, so people don’t work hard their whole lives and retire poor.
They understand the need for balance – about prioritising so that they’re not living to work, but working to live a life outside of work.
They understand that healthy and quality of life are linked.
They live with the ups and downs of life – whether it’s divorce or illness or ageing parents or beautiful babies with developmental delays.
The people we represent are living in the 21st century – our challenge is to make sure our governments do the same.
New Democrats, progress is not about bricks and mortar – it’s about hearts and souls.
It’s about enabling people to live long lives, full of meaning and purpose.
That’s the promise of progress – and it’s a burden of principle and purpose that progressive parties must carry.
Our reward is not a monument on a hill – it’s a young person in a job.
It’s the reward of knowing the power of a good idea – like Medicare.
There’s a good idea that Canada came up with – and 16,000 kilometres away a Labor Government followed.
It’s a good idea like a National Disability Insurance Scheme or a decent retirement income.
And it’s the knowledge that you only need one victory to change your country – and maybe another country as well – forever and for the better.
New Democrats, I’m going to be blunt.
Despite all that we have achieved, published opinion polls have not been favourable to our Government of late.
It’s going to be tough for Australian Labor to win in September.
But we can win – because we must win – because we know what is at stake.
Let me tell you something: progressive politics is not for the fainthearted – or the short sighted.
It requires vision. It requires heart. It requires endurance.
You have to prosecute the case for reform – for change – and the burden of proof is bloody hard work.
You have to constantly prove your case. But your opponents don’t.
You have to tell a story that’s built on principle and purpose.
And even when you’re right – and we usually are – it takes years, decades, for the jury to come back in your favour.
That’s the burden of progress.
We know we must never be satisfied with the way things are, but continually strive to put things right … to make them as they should be.
New Democrats, in the end progress is all about twin concepts: idealism and pragmatism.
You have to stand for something – and you have to be prepared to make something happen.
In politics it’s true that no matter how hard the contest, if you are prepared to go one day longer than those who say change is too hard, then victory is inevitable.
New Democrats, I congratulate you on how far you have come.
You know change is coming – that change is inevitable.
You don’t fear change. You want to shape it.
You are not pre-occupied with the few, but the many.
You respect success, but you want opportunity for all, not just some.
You include all business people and unionists.
You seek consensus over conflict.
You value diversity, be it linguistic, cultural or sexuality.
You believe in the creation of national wealth, and thereafter the fair distribution of national income.
You know that it’s not enough to simply be the conscience of the nation.
You know to make a difference you need to win.
We are the hopers, the dreamers, the optimists, the chancers, the unifiers.
They are pessimists, the naysayers and the dividers.
I truly believe the times do suit you.
I wish you all the best with your convention and every success in your contests ahead.
Bonne chance. Good luck.
Merci. And I thank you.
Mr Shorten’s Media Contact: Jessica Lindell 0408 642 804
ASIA-PACIFIC FINANCIAL MARKET DEVELOPMENT SYMPOSIUM
ASIA-PACIFIC FINANCIAL MARKET DEVELOPMENT SYMPOSIUM
10 APRIL 2013
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS OMITTED
My apologies for not being there in person today.
It almost goes without saying that you are meeting in the heart of Australia’s world class financial services sector.
Many of Australia’s biggest banks, investment funds and superannuation funds are headquartered in Sydney.
Sydney is also home to the ASX, our regulators, and to many of our best and brightest financial minds.
So I apologise again that I can’t be there.
In many ways I think the fact that I am speaking with you from Beijing highlights our connections as a region, despite the vast distances we are apart.
It is this – the power of our connections – which I want to talk to you about today.
The Asia-Pacific is a diverse place.
That over 16 countries are represented at the Symposium is a testament to that fact.
We are region which is diverse historically, culturally, linguistically – yet we are all connected.
Australia’s friendship with China bears this out.
It was 1971 when Gough Whitlam had the vision, and the sense of history, to send a message to Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai [Z-hoe En-lie] suggesting they meet to discuss ‘matters of mutual concern.’
Whitlam, then Opposition leader, was panned by his critics and provoked fascination from international observers with his historic reaching out to China.
It is a matter of historical fact that Whitlam made the right call – and indeed that his public trip coincided with clandestine meetings between Henry Kissinger and the Chinese government showed that Whitlam was a leader truly ahead of his time.
During those few weeks in July 1971, a few days before Whitlam’s birthday, a connection was made.
Tom Burns, the then President of the ALP and a member of the 1971 delegation, recalled in 2006 that it was close to midnight when Whitlam and the attendant press pack was summoned to the Great Hall of the People.
There the two men sat.
Prime Minister Whitlam – the erudite Sydney barrister – youthful and supremely self-assured.
Premier Zhou – the suave bureaucrat raised on classical Chinese literature – toured the international horizon with Whitlam, who by all accounts acquitted himself well.
As Burns recalls, after three hours of conversation Premier Zhou corrected his interpreter in perfect English, with a smile.
The two spent the next half hour talking in English about Greek mythology, their travels in France…
…“matters of mutual concern” indeed.
Save for the gold spittoons and endless packs of Panda brand cigarettes, the Great Hall of the People – with its mammoth wooden doors, huge gold columns and romantic landscape murals – had stood largely unchanged since that first meeting between China and Australia.
But our friendship, and our connection, has gone from strength to strength, to the benefit of both our countries.
I participated in historic discussions between Prime Minister Gillard and Premier Li last night and I can assure you both leaders of our great nations are firmly focussed on financial services, and indeed it was one of the first issues which they discussed.
Benefits of increased connections
Friends, there are many benefits of strengthening our financial connections as a region.
As the fasted growing region of the world, the Asia-Pacific has much to gain from banding together.
As a region, we have already taken steps to shock-proof our markets.
The actions taken following the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis are an example of this.
The crisis spurred policymakers to develop new regional arrangements to help address the region’s vulnerabilities to external shocks.
This resulted in a number of initiatives aimed at developing the region’s bond markets, such as the Asia Bond Market Initiative and the Asian Bond Fund Initiatives.
Further examples of financial cooperation in East Asia include the Chiang Mai Initiative and the ASEAN+3 Macroeconomic Regional Office.
These both show how we are determined to build a strong regional financial architecture critical for crisis prevention, management and resolution in the region.
This generation of reforms has undoubtedly brought Asian markets closer together.
The need to invest in the region
But the fact is too much capital in the Asia-Pacific is leaving the region seeking investment elsewhere.
A 2010 McKinsey Global Institute report has projected that by 2020, global investment demand could reach levels not seen since the post-war rebuilding of Europe and Japan, being driven by demand in emerging markets.
Nevertheless, most investors still prefer to invest outside the region, creating a critical gap.
In 2011, only 22.1 per cent of the Asia-Pacific region’s cross‑border assets were held in Asian equities, with a mere 9.4 per cent in debt securities.
Too much Asian capital is leaving the region.
This is a trend which needs reversing.
Because it’s not like there aren’t productive investments to be made in Asia.
Take infrastructure for example, which is essential for lowering barriers for trade, raising productivity, and generating jobs throughout the region.
It’s particularly striking speaking to you from China, where massive infrastructure in investment has gone hand in glove with economic growth.
To illustrate this, between 1998 and 2006, investment in infrastructure in China grew from 5.7 per cent of China’s GDP to 14.4 per cent of GDP.
Moreover, the Asian Development Bank has estimated that almost $8 trillion is needed for infrastructure investment in the region through to 2020.
So while the focus of this forum is about financial markets, we must never forget that the function of financial markets is ultimately to support real economic activity.
Activity which supports jobs and growth, lifts peoples’ standard of living, leaves the world a better place for our children and grandchildren than the one we inherited.
Bettering our connections
I can report the Australian Government is taking steps to further strengthen the connections in our region.
The Government has taken up the challenge of cementing Australia as a regional financial centre.
We have committed to establish the Investment Manager Regime, which establishes a framework for global investors to utilise the talents of Australia’s financial sector professionals.
Late last week I released a draft of legislation that we hope to pass by 30 June this year finalise this important reform.
We have undertaken a number of reforms to broaden and deepen our financial markets in Australia, making them an even more attractive place for global investors.
We have taken steps to create a deep and liquid corporate bond market in Australia.
The Government has passed legislation to enable the retail trading of Commonwealth Government Securities.
Trading is expected to commence in the first half of this year.
We have also introduced legislation into the Australian Parliament that will further encourage the development of Australia’s corporate bond market, through the reduction of red tape on the issuance of simple corporate bonds.
And whilst in China the Prime Minister has announced Australia’s will be the third major currency in the world to be directly convertible with the Chinese Renminbi, after the US dollar and the Japanese Yen.
As a Government, we are also eager to progress the idea of an Asian Region Funds Passport.
Because we believe that the whole region would benefit from a more streamlined, efficient and uniform licensing regime.
This makes us more attractive to foreign capital…
…and allows funds to market products across the region.
The Australian Government believes this is an idea with merit, and we have taken the lead in working in the Asia-Pacific region to develop a pilot model for the Passport.
As a Government, we remain committed to promoting Australia as a financial services hub with a strong, dynamic financial services sector and competitive markets, and promoting the growth of the Asia-Pacific as a great place to do business.
I am pleased to announce today that Financial and Energy Exchange Global Pty Ltd Financial Market (FEX) has been granted an Australian market licence to establish a market for energy, commodity and environmental derivatives.
The establishment of the FEX market expands the range of options for participants in Australia’s financial markets.
I can also announce the Government has granted LCH.Clearnet Limited (LCH) an Australian Clearing and Settlement facility licence to clear and settle contracts traded on the FEX market.
The licence will also be the first non-ASX clearing licence in Australia in relation to a significant market.
By encouraging competition we are promoting Australia as a financial services centre and helping ensure our financial markets are efficient and innovative.
The decision will provide a trading venue to trade specialised derivative products, and provide a greater service offering to the market. This will benefit participants, investors and the Australian market more broadly.
I believe we are all optimistic about our nations and our region.
And I believe we all share the belief that as a region we have much to gain from building connections and growing the financial services sector which we all have a stake in.
I believe there is a need to develop regional financial architecture to assist us with our global challenges in areas like health, infrastructure and the common challenge of our ageing populations.
It is this sense of purpose which I hope guides this Symposium over the coming days.
I thank you.
Minister Shorten’s Media Contact: Jessica Lindell 0408 642 804
CONFERENCE OF MAJOR SUPERANNUATION FUNDS
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Twenty years ago this week the then Labor Treasurer, John Dawkins, addressed this conference in Wollongong.
After reviewing the remarkable progress of growth in superannuation – which had seen growth of the pool between 1983 and 1992 increase from $22 billion to $140 billion – the then Treasurer told those present
“Notwithstanding the progress to date, there is an on-going task.”
In the 20 years since, I wish to report to you today the progress which has been hard-won in superannuation.
Thanks to successive Labor Governments, the total pool of superannuation savings has grown from $140 billion in 1992 to $1.5 trillion – or equal to Australia’s GDP.
Rice Warner’s latest Superannuation Market Projections Report projects the total market to grow to over $3.1 trillion in the 15 years to 2027, in 2012 dollars.
According to Rice Warner, this quick growth is due to the “significant compulsory component within that market, driven by the Superannuation Guarantee”.
Looking further ahead, Treasury expects our superannuation savings pool to grow to $6 trillion by June 2037.
The recent superannuation reforms by our Treasurer Wayne Swan and this Government will add $500 billion to the pool of savings by 2037.
As a Government, we have cut the 15 per cent tax paid on superannuation for 3.6 million Australians earning under $37,000.
We have legislated to gradually increase the superannuation guarantee to 12 per cent.
And the downward pressure on fees and charges triggered by the My Super and Super Stream reforms will add to the bottom line of every working Australian’s superannuation savings.
But to echo the words of John Dawkins of 20 years ago, notwithstanding the progress to date, there is an on-going task.
Those among us who are over 65 now are only 3 million in number, but by 2050 there’ll be 8.1 million of us.
Today there are fifty of us in work for every ten of us in retirement.
By 2050, there will be twenty-seven of us in work for every ten of us in retirement.
These days we’re probably at school and in college until we’re 20 or 25, and we shall be students retraining our whole adult life.
We shall work for 35 to 40 years, and after that we have another twenty or even thirty years to think about things, play bowls, go fishing, join reading groups, write family histories, and the rest of it. Thirty years, perhaps. Forty, maybe.
Life itself, our life on earth, has been redefined by these new unchangeable figures of a long and largely healthy life.
With though the recognition of greater frailty and possible diminished confidence in one’s ninth and tenth decades.
I want to talk about three things in my address to you today:
- Provide some context, and some history, about what superannuation was designed to do;
- Make observations on missed opportunities in superannuation
- Discuss what I believe represent some of the priorities in superannuation policies to assist Australians enjoy adequate retirement income.
By any measure, the value of superannuation is only going to grow in the decades ahead.
Not only the value of the national savings pool, but the value to all Australians, as our population ages, of having a robust superannuation system they know they can rely on in retirement.
That’s why it’s so important for us to make good decisions now, so our system remains strong, stable and settled.
We need to continue to reinforce the confidence of Australians in superannuation.
What superannuation was designed to do
Before 1985, Australia had relied on the taxpayer provided Age Pension as its principle post-employment income system.
Up until that time, private retirement income under the superannuation provisions applied to the upper end of the commercial sector and to employees in the public sector.
The great majority of working Australians had no viable access to the generosity of the pre-1983 superannuation tax provisions.
The first move towards universal access under the superannuation provisions came as part of the Hawke-Keating government’s Accord with the Australian Council of Trade Unions, led by Bill Kelty.
Government and unions agreed that the profit share in the economy had to be restored to re-ignite private investment. At the time, unemployment and inflation were both hovering around 10 percent.
In return for this restraint the Government supported the ACTU’s claim that 3 percentage points of wages should be contributed by employers to a superannuation account in the name of each worker.
This was 1985. And subsequent Labor Governments have built our world beating superannuation system.
Not long after becoming Prime Minister, Paul Keating announced the introduction of the Superannuation Guarantee Charge.
Under this nation building, wealth enriching legislation, employer contributions to superannuation would rise from four percentage points of ordinary time earnings in 1992-93 to nine percentage points of ordinary time earnings by 2002-2003.
Every year the Superannuation Guarantee Charge grew by a further 1 percent of employer contributions towards the 9 percent target, unit labour costs fell.
In fact, every year the Superannuation Guarantee Charge grew by a further one per cent of employer contributions towards the 9 per cent target unemployment fell, business profits as a percentage of GDP grew, as did real wages.
This meant that the cost of superannuation was never borne by employers. It was absorbed into the overall wage cost.
Had employers not paid 9 percentage points of wages as superannuation contributions to employee super accounts: they would have paid it in cash as wages.
As Prime Minister Keating said in 2007: “when you hear conservatives these days speak of superannuation as a tax on employers they are either ill-informed or they are lying. The fall in unit labour costs and the upward shift in the profit share during the period of the Superannuation Guarantee Charge is simply a matter of statistical record. It is not a matter of argument.”
Today the savings pool is worth more than $1.5 trillion to the nation.
Our retirement savings system is the fourth biggest pool of funds under management on the planet.
The Superannuation Guarantee legislation has since proven fundamental to the sustainability of our private retirement income.
Superannuation has proved to be a terrific idea; blessing Australia with a national institution that almost every developed economy in the rest of the world would give their eye teeth for.
In the Hawke-Keating years, Labor’s retirement income system was built around three pillars:
- The age pension – to provide a minimum level of income support – but one which is inevitably hostage to political whims and budget constraints of the Government of the day.
- Universal, mandated superannuation for the middle classes with a goal of a replacement rate of 70% of pre-retirement incomes
- For those with the means, voluntary savings above and beyond superannuation. This was to be concessionally taxed within a reasonable benefit limit.
The great missed opportunity
It’s an often forgotten fact of Australian political history that John Howard went to the 1996 election promising to increase universal superannuation to 15 per cent.
This was arguably one of the greatest missed opportunities from the conservative side of politics in superannuation policy.
A full six percentage points of national income lost for a decade to the capital markets, to national savings and to millions of future retirees.
One should be able to assume Conservative governments can understand the merit of savings.
History recalls that for 12 years, superannuation levels were stalled at 9 per cent.
Additionally, despite its good intent Costello’s co-contribution scheme failed to understand that for the majority of Australian workers having a spare $1000 cash to put into your super was pure fantasy.
Indeed only one in every five workers eligible for the co-contribution actually used it.
Our ongoing task
In just four years, 20 per cent of Australia’s population will be over 65. Australians are living longer and in this context, our superannuation system needs to be fair and needs to be sustainable.
The Gillard-Swan Labor Government will never lose sight of the low-paid, we’ll always support and strengthen the safety net of the aged-pension.
But superannuation was never designed as a welfare tool for low income earners.
That is appropriately the preserve of the aged pension, and this Labor Government has significantly improved our pension system.
Superannuation was designed to reward and supports the Australian middle-class, those on multiples of average earnings, to save for a comfortable, secure and financially adequate retirement.
We want a system which rewards a lifetime of hard work, and ideally ensures that Australian workers have something approaching 70 per cent replacement rate of their working income.
People need to have sufficient savings to retire comfortably – adequately.
We owe it to all Australians, present and future, to sustain a system that gives everybody a fair shot at a decent and dignified retirement.
This is our ongoing task in superannuation.
It is a task which requires long-term thinking.
In 20, 30, 40 years and beyond when Australian workers are retiring, they will not remember today’s opinion polls, speculative budget stories or any of the other flotsam and jetsam which washes through the 24 hour media cycle.
They won’t remember line items in annual budgets.
As a Government, we recognise the need to provide superannuation policy certainty.
To look beyond the electoral cycle and instead focus on what current generations of working Australians will want from their retirement in the decades to come.
We recognise that community confidence in superannuation is important – not just for the industry or the markets – but for those mums and dads, and sons and daughters, whose hard working wages are compulsorily deferred to provide for their retirement security.
And we recognise that, fundamentally, superannuation represents a charter with working Australians.
A charter that says, we will help you save for your retirement through mandated employer contributions and tax concessionality, and in return you are part of a wealth creating, job generating, GFC-proofing idea that sets Australia apart from much of the developed world.
Labor never, never, never, never gives up on supporting superannuation.
Only a Labor Government could ever legislate to convince Australian workers to put 12 per cent of their wages into savings.
We invented universal superannuation and the Liberals opposed it.
We voted to increase superannuation from 3 to 9 per cent – and the Liberals opposed it.
We voted to increase superannuation from 9 to 12 per cent – and the Liberals opposed it.
We voted to remove the tax paid on superannuation by 3.6 million low-paid workers, including 2.1 million women, and the Liberals opposed it.
So when the Liberal’s now cry wolf and propose not to make “any negative unexpected changes”, it must be viewed through the prism of their record.
A record that opposed superannuation every step of the way.
A record of missed opportunities.
Labor is the party of superannuation. We established it and we continue to improve it.
It has taken Labor a generation to establish the legacy and we shall not let our opponents steal the record.
Labor superannuation policy over 20 years has, is, and will be guided by the following vision:
- Australians are living longer (longevity)
- They will need to have sufficient savings to retire comfortably (adequacy)
- And Australians want the process of superannuation policy- making to be de-politicised
- Because community confidence in the superannuation system is important.
Only Labor is focused on the future, the next 20, 30, and 40 years.
Only Labor is focussed on what it wants superannuation to achieve for Australians – to provide a secure retirement.
I thank you.
Mr Shorten’s Media Contact: Sam Casey — 0421 697 660
SECOND READING SPEECH Fair Work Amendment Bill 2013
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
This Labor Government fundamentally believes that the prosperity of Australia relies largely upon the creation of productive value in Australian workplaces.
This Labor Government is committed to ensuring that all Australians have an opportunity to find a job. This Labor Government encourages productive, collaborative, innovative, profitable, safe and cooperative workplaces.
The Fair Work Act considers the context of productivity in its objectives. Many unsupported opinions have been made to suggest the Fair Work Act has had a negative impact on productivity.
It is important that the record be set straight in the Parliament about why the allegations against the Act do not stand up to scrutiny.
The independent and expert Fair Work Act Review Panel found the Fair Work Act is operating as intended and in accordance with the objects of the legislation – which includes productivity and economic growth.
The Panel confirmed that the Act does not negatively impact productivity growth. This conclusion is confirmed by the independent data provided by the ABS. Over the last five quarters, annual productivity growth has been above its historical average.
Labour productivity in the market sector grew by 2.9 per cent in 2011-12, a significant improvement over labour productivity growth in the previous year and above the historical average of 2.2 per cent per annum since 1994-95.
While productivity estimates can be volatile, productivity growth in the last year has been fairly rapid in the context of a longer-term slowdown since the 1990s.
In fact, productivity growth under the Fair Work Act is superior than that under previous workplace relations regimes. Indeed, productivity growth under our Fair Work Act is around triple the rate than that experienced under the former Coalition Government’s disastrous Work Choices.
This demonstrates that those who seek to argue that there is a ‘productivity problem’ with the Fair Work legislation – and argue this as justification for adopting a more draconian workplace relations regime – well they are simply wrong.
This Government installed a legislative framework to improve productivity through a focus on protecting terms and conditions, through dialogue and negotiation at the workplace level.
While it would be wrong to suggest the Fair Work Act alone is solely or largely responsible for this productivity performance, it is clearly a fallacy to suggest that the Act has been a drag on Australia’s productivity performance.
Indeed the evidence on Australia’s economic performance is compelling: there are more Australians in work in than ever before and our jobs growth is at least twice as fast as any of the major advanced economies. Productivity is up, wages growth is steady and restrained and jobs are being created (some 480 jobs a day since we came to office), economic growth is up, interest rates are down and inflation is down. Importantly the markets are up and superannuation returns and contributions are up, and there are record levels of capital expenditure expected over the coming year.
In addition, industrial disputation is down and is at one third the rate we saw under the previous Government. In the building and construction industry the rate is less than one fifth the rate we saw under the Howard Government.
Productivity is not about cutting wages or entitlements. We do not support to a workplace relations system that lets important protections be undermined through the false flag of a ‘race to the bottom’ brand of flexibility.
We understand that that the drivers of productivity improvement at the enterprise level are stimulated by innovation and creativity.
We understand that engagement at all levels of the enterprise needs to occur not just during bargaining for an agreement or contract once every three or four years, but on a day to day basis.
When I think what every company and every work site I have visited over the last twenty years has taught me, it is the potential for greatness that individuals carry within them. Those workplaces showed me the limitless capacity of Australian workers and Australian businesses—and, thus, the limitless potential of the Australian economy and Australian society.
The Fair Work Act promotes this engagement.
That is why this Government is funding the creation of the Centre for Workplace Leadership to create higher performing workplaces and stronger leadership capability in Australian workplaces.
Engaged employees are productive employees.
It is also why one of the amendments in this Bill, reflecting recommendation 1 of the Review Panel is to include in the functions of the Fair Work Commission that it should promote cooperative and productive workplace relations.
This Government has also done more to support modern Australian families balance their work and life than any other Government before it.
We believe in a balanced framework that supports cooperative and productive workplace relations and promotes economic prosperity and social inclusion for all.
It was this Government that established a strong safety net comprising the National Employment Standards and modern awards, providing all employees in the federal system with clear, comprehensive and enforceable minimum terms and conditions of employment.
It was this Government that responded to the needs of carers and parents by providing employees with a right to request flexible work arrangements to help them in balancing their work and family life for the first time.
It was this Government that provided more flexible parental leave arrangements through the Fair Work Act, as well as paid parental leave and Dad and Partner Pay.
And that is why, as part of this Bill, the Government is seeking to ensure that work at hours which are not family friendly is fairly remunerated. This will be done by amending the modern awards objective to ensure that the Fair Work Commission, in carrying out its role, must take into account the need to provide additional remuneration for employees working outside normal hours, such as employees working overtime or on weekends.
The Government recognises that there are certain groups that require additional support to balance work and life, particularly those employees with special caring responsibilities.
Through the Fair Work Act Review all stakeholders, whether employers and employees, unions and employer organisations and others were given the opportunity to respond to the question: is this legislation working and what can we change to ensure this legislation is meeting its purpose?
The Fair Work Act review came after the extensive, public, consultation and drafting process we completed for the Fair Work Act:
- We released our policy proposals in workplace relations in April before the 2007 November election. We provided further detail of our policy proposals in August that year;
- We released exposure draft legislation of the National Employment Standards; and
- We engaged with employee and employer representatives through the National Workplace Relations Consultative Council, through the Small Business Working Group and consultation directly with employers, employees and unions.
This is the consultative, open and engaged model I have continued as Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations.
This Bill, the Fair Work Amendment Bill 2013, represents our further response to the Fair Work Act Review recommendations, but it also represents key policy priorities of this Government.
The Bill includes new family friendly arrangements such as further flexibility in relation to unpaid parental leave, the right for pregnant women to transfer to a safe job and an expanded right to request flexible working arrangements including for working parents, for workers with caring responsibilities, workers who are of mature age or who have a disability and those suffering family violence.
The Bill also includes new consultative requirements to recognise employees have family responsibilities outside of work that can be adversely affected when changes to employees’ rosters and regular working hours are proposed.
In response to recommendations of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Employment inquiry into bullying the Bill introduces a long overdue remedy for victims being bullied at work to seek a timely recourse through the Fair Work Commission.
Bullying is a real menace in our workplaces that costs the economy as it damages productivity. Most tragically, it hurts people – sometimes with fatal consequences as my friends the Panlocks learned, to their lasting grief.
Finally the Bill provides for reforms to the right of entry regime in response to the independent Fair Work Review Panel recommendations, with amendments to better balance unions being able to represent their members professionally with the need for employers to go about their business productively.
The measures in this Bill are entirely consistent with the objective of the Fair Work Act to support cooperative and productive workplace relations.
Family friendly arrangements
The proposed family friendly amendments will help parents balance their family and work commitments.
The first amendment we are proposing will increase the amount of concurrent unpaid parental leave from three weeks to eight weeks. In addition, the new eight week period of concurrent leave will be able to be taken in separate blocks, of no less than two weeks, at any time during the first twelve months after the birth of the child.
At present concurrent leave can only be taken at the time of the birth or placement of a child. The changes will provide greater flexibility for parents in responding to the caring needs of their new child and better align with Dad and Partner Pay, which can be accessed at any time during the first twelve months after the birth of a child.
The Bill also includes two amendments aimed at ensuring the safety and wellbeing of pregnant employees.
The first of these will implement the independent Review Panel’s recommendation that any unpaid special maternity leave taken by a pregnant employee should not reduce that employee’s entitlement to unpaid parental leave.
Special maternity leave is provided for circumstances such as a woman suffering a pregnancy related illness. This amendment will ensure that the employee is not penalised when they are forced to take special maternity leave as a result of circumstances outside of her control. It will mean they retain their full entitlement to unpaid parental leave.
The second amendment is specifically aimed at protecting the safety of pregnant employees at the workplace. At present there is an express right in the Fair Work Act for a pregnant employee to transfer to a safe job where they can provide evidence that they cannot continue in their usual role due to an illness or risk arising from their pregnancy.
The right only exists for workers who have served 12 months’ service, amongst other things. We are proposing to ensure that employees who will have less than 12 months’ service at the time of birth the right to transfer to a safe job. Where no safe job is available, the employee in this situation would be eligible for unpaid no safe job leave.
This Labor Government was the first Government to introduce a legislated right to request flexible working arrangements in 2009 to allow workers to care for a child under school age or a child under 18 years with a disability.
The independent Review Panel’s report found that the right to request provisions are beneficial to both employees and employers, and a recent report from the Fair Work Commission’s General Manager found that over 90 per cent of requests for flexible working arrangements were granted by employers.
The Review Panel recommended that the right be extended to a larger range of workers, including those with caring responsibilities.
This Bill implements that Recommendation by providing the right to request flexible working arrangements to:
- all employees with caring responsibilities;
- an employee who is a parent, or has responsibility for the care, of a child of school age;
- employees who have a disability;
- employees aged 55 years and over;
- employees who are experiencing family violence;
- employees providing personal care, support and assistance to a member of their immediate family, or a member of their household, who requires care or support because the individual is experiencing family violence; and
- an employee returning from parental leave having the explicit right to request part time work.
This Bill will also introduce new rostering protections.
We all arrange our lives around work commitments, so when work rosters change at short notice there is an impact not just on our work life, but also our family life. The unilateral imposition of changed rosters and working hours can cause particular hardship for people who have family caring responsibilities.
The amendments will place an obligation on employers to provide employees with information about changes to their roster or hours of work and consult with employees on the impact any changes will have, including on the employees’ family and caring responsibilities.
Employers must then consider any views the employees have about how the change will impact them before implementing any changes.
The proposed approach will ensure that when decisions on rostering and working conditions are made, they involve a consideration of the needs of both employers and employees.
The dispute resolution mechanisms of relevant workplace instruments will continue to apply in relation to consultation obligations in awards and enterprise agreements, including these new consultation requirements.
Anti-bullying
All Australian workers have a right to return safely home from work.
All Australian workers have a right to a safe and healthy workplace that is free from bullying and harassment.
Last year, the Government initiated a Parliamentary inquiry, Chaired by the Member for Kingston, into workplace bullying in response to community concerns about the impact of bullying across Australian workplaces and industries.
Over 300 individuals and organisations gave evidence to the Inquiry about the damaging, and in many cases, long-lasting effects of bullying.
The evidence to the Inquiry was overwhelming that the status quo was manifestly inadequate at protecting vulnerable workers.
For workers, bullying causes physical and psychological injuries, a loss of enjoyment and satisfaction from work and, in some cases, the loss of a job and future career opportunities.
For employers, workplace bullying reduces employee morale and productivity, increases absenteeism and staff turnover, increases workers’ compensation costs and results in a loss of business reputation.
On 12 February 2013, I tabled the Government’s response to the report by the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Employment – Workplace Bullying “We just want it to stop”.
The Committee made 23 recommendations to eliminate and prevent bullying in the workplace and support workers and employers to respond more effectively to allegations of bullying.
One of the key issues highlighted by the Committee was the difficulty people face in trying to find a quick way to make the bullying stop so that they do not suffer further harm or injury.
The Committee recommended that the Government provide an individual right of recourse to provide a new and timely mechanism to help people resolve bullying matters quickly and inexpensively.
This Bill provides that a worker who has been bullied at work will be able to make an application to the Fair Work Commission for assistance to resolve the bullying.
The Bill defines ‘bullying’ as repeated unreasonable behaviour directed towards a worker, or a group of workers of which the individual is a member, that creates a risk to health and safety.
Importantly, the Bill expressly states that reasonable management action conducted in a reasonable manner is not bullying.
To support the early resolution of matters, the Fair Work Commission will be required to commence to deal with a matter within 14 days of an application being made. This may include seeking further information from the parties, conducting a conference to try and resolve matter, or holding a hearing.
Where a worker has been bullied and the matter cannot be resolved between the parties, the Fair Work Commission will have the power to make an order to prevent bullying in the workplace in the future. While the Commission will be able to make a range of orders, this will not include being able to order compensation.
Breach of an order made by the Commission will attract a maximum penalty of 60 penalty units (or up to $10,200 for an individual or $51 000 for a body corporate).
This Bill is designed to complement, not replace, existing work health and safety obligations on employers and workers and the work done by work health and safety regulators.
This new individual right of recourse will encourage early intervention to stop the bullying, help people resume normal working relationships, and prevent further episodes of bullying in the workplace into the future.
Right of entry
The last set of changes in the Bill relate to right of entry.
As a Government we believe in freedom of association.
We believe that people have a right to choose to belong or not to belong to a union.
We believe that the vast majority of trade unions and employer organisations are democratic and accountable to their members. We also believe that anyone in a position of trust or responsibility in a registered organisation must comply with the law.
There are clear rules about right of entry in the Fair Work Act.
The Government’s policy intention when setting those rules and introducing the amendments in this Bill is to balance the right of employers to go about their business without undue interference with the democratic right of employees to be represented in the workplace and to participate in discussions with their union at appropriate times.
In almost all cases entry to workplaces by permit holders involves no disruption to a business’ operation. The Review Panel was however concerned that in some workplaces the frequency of visits by some unions was imposing a significant burden on employers in dealing with those visits.
It therefore recommended that the Fair Work Commission should have greater powers to deal with disputes about the frequency of right of entry visits to a workplace.
The Bill will implement that recommendation and give the Fair Work Commission the capacity to deal with disputes about the frequency of visits to hold discussions. The Fair Work Commission will be able to make any order it considers appropriate if satisfied that the frequency of visits by a permit holder or permit holders of the one union would require an unreasonable diversion of the occupier’s critical resources.
The Bill will also address the problem identified by the Review Panel in relation to disputes over the location for interviews and discussions between right of entry permit holders and eligible employees. In the vast majority of cases permit holders and employers agree on a suitable location for such visits without conflict.
In some workplaces however, evidence presented to the Review Panel showed that some employers had dictated that rooms be used which would discourage or intimidate employees from meeting with the union.
Permit holders are permitted under the Act to hold discussions with workers during mealtimes and other breaks. It is reasonable that, in clarifying the rules about location, we provide for discussions to occur in the locations where workers ordinarily spend their breaks.
The Bill therefore clarifies that in instances where a reasonable location for discussions can’t be agreed between the parties the discussions will be held in any room or area in which meal or other breaks are ordinarily taken by employees.
Permit holders will continue to be required to comply with an occupier’s reasonable request to take a particular route to reach the room or area where the discussions are to be held. The requirement that such a request by an employer will not be unreasonable only because it is not the route that the permit holder would have chosen is retained in this Bill.
The current conduct rules applying to permit holders, occupiers and employers in respect of right of entry will continue to apply unchanged.
The Fair Work Commission will maintain its powers to restrict the rights of an organisation or permit holder that has misused their entry rights.
The Government believes that all Australian workers, regardless of the location of their workplace, have a right to union representation and that unions should have fair access those workers they are entitled to represent. For this reason the Bill will introduce an obligation on an employer to facilitate access to travel and accommodation for permit holders to access certain remote locations where access can only occur by the employer assisting with transport or accommodation.
These new requirements will apply only where premises are not reasonably accessible by transport other than that provided by the occupier of the premises or that the nature of the premises means the permit holder is required to stay overnight and no accommodation other than that provided by the occupier is reasonably available.
To ensure that the rights of employees and unions are balanced with the need of the employer to carry on their business without undue interference, this obligation will not apply if it would cause the occupier undue inconvenience. Furthermore, a permit holder or union must make a request for transport or accommodation in a reasonable period of time before that transport and/or accommodation is required.
Let me be clear – the access is to facilitate right of entry, not for ‘helicopter joyrides’; this is not for employers to pay the cost of transportation. The Bill does not provide that the cost of transport and accommodation has to be paid by the employer facilitating access to the location.
What the Bill provides is that if an arrangement for accommodation or transport is made, the occupier may charge the union or permit holder that amount necessary to cover the cost of that transport and/or accommodation.
Greenfields and intractable bargaining
The Fair Work Act Review Panel extensively considered concerns about greenfields negotiations raised by stakeholders. In its report the independent Panel expressed the view that there are significant risks that bargaining practices associated with greenfields agreements could threaten investment in major projects.
The Panel recommended that the Government implement amendments to the Fair Work Act providing for FWA to arbitrate to determine the content of an agreement where negotiations have reached an impasse, a specified time period has expired and conciliation has failed.
The Government supports this recommendation and I will continue to work with employers and unions on these matters with a view to introducing further legislative reforms in this area during the Winter Sittings.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this Bill reflects the Government’s commitment to improving the lives of Australian workers, whilst supporting business flexibility and profitability.
These modest, balanced and pragmatic enhancements to the Fair Work Act proposed in this Bill will further encourage productive, collaborative and clever workplaces.
It will also provide certainty for employers in key areas while ensuring that all workers, especially those with family and caring responsibilities, can effectively participate in the workforce and be represented at work.
This Bill implements several of the recommendations of the Review Panel and is the result of extensive consultation with both employer and employee stakeholders during the Review and since the Review report was published last year.
As I said when I stood here in October 2012 introducing the Fair Work Amendment Bill 2012, I and the Government will keep an open mind on the remaining recommendations of the Fair Work Act Review Panel and other measures to improve the operation of the Fair Work framework.
We are committed to working with all stakeholders to implement further changes if there is clear policy justification and changes reflect the government’s overall policy of maintaining a fair, flexible and productive workplace relations framework.
I believe we can do more to harness the capacity of Australian people. To do this, we need to cut across the old narratives of conflict and division. I have experienced first-hand many examples of cooperation, compromise and pragmatism at workplaces around Australia. There are many untold success stories of business and workers that should be told and should be celebrated. We must move from a stuck in a business-as-usual routine to support those who pursue innovation, knowledge and creativity. Those are the drivers of economic growth and must be the drivers of our future. Those are the drivers that will unlock the full potential of our workplaces and create good jobs.
I urge all members to support this Bill and support its passage through the Parliament. I commend the Bill to the House.
Minister Shorten’s Media Contact: Jessica Lindell 0408 642 804
