Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I too rise in this section of the debate to ask a few questions and to speak in favour the amendment being moved. My questions to the parliamentary secretary quite simply go to the heart of what we are debating right now: does the parliamentary secretary think that it is fair that cleaners working in government buildings should take a pay cut? Does the government agree with the Prime Minister's statement before the House that:

I want to make it absolutely crystal clear that no cleaner's pay is reduced.

If he agrees with that statement, what guarantees will the government put in place to ensure that cleaners' pay is not cut if this bill is approved today? Will the government ensure that cleaning contractors will compete on quality and not on price that could see cleaners face a pay cut of $340 a week?

My next question to the parliamentary secretary is: why is the government prioritising a $50,000 per year Paid Parental Leave scheme for some of our highest paid workers instead of prioritising the pay and conditions of the lowest paid workers—the cleaners? Further, if the government is so concerned about pay parity between private sector and public sector workers, why is it not doing more to support and ensure that cleaners' pay in government buildings continues to be at a pay parity rate with cleaners working in the private sector?

We have heard that this bill is being rushed through. There has been a gag motion placed to stop the opposition being able to ask these questions, to have the proper scrutiny in relation to many measures outlined in this very large bill today. The one that we have highlighted is that buried in this bill is an attack on cleaners' wages. These cleaners are some of our lowest paid workers in in our community and this government seeks through this measure to ensure that their wages could be cut by as much as $5 an hour. The government, by passing this bill, will either demonstrate that the Prime Minister has lied in this chamber, does not understand how contracting works or is simply behind the times when it comes to what his government is doing. It is not fair to stand up and say, with cleaners in the gallery, that their pay will not reduce and then a few weeks later introduce a bill that seeks to do exactly that. Contracting, by its nature, as we have seen, if you are competing against companies that pay the award, it will go to the lowest price; it will not go to the quality with cleaners.

So my questions to the government go to the heart of contracting. Are they going to stand by and watch cleaning companies competing on the award undercut cleaning companies currently paying the Clean Start rate, currently paying in accordance with the cleaning guidelines that this government seeks to abolish? This is purely and simply about fairness. This is about making sure that some of our lowest paid people working in the Commonwealth sector continue to see decent rates of pay—that they have pay parity with people working in other office environments, cleaning in other offices for other major corporates and businesses in our CBD and in Canberra. It is not fair for somebody cleaning a government department to be paid $5 an hour less than someone cleaning BHP head office. It is the same work. Yet what we have seen from this government in this bill— (Time expired)

See this speech in context