SUBJECT/S: Penalty rates; Reshuffle; Seat of Herbert.
ELLEN FANNING: We’ve had a commitment from both major parties to work more cooperatively and find common ground in this new parliament. So yesterday Labor Leader Bill Shorten tweeted that he’d written to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull suggesting that the Government join Labor in writing a joint submission to the Fair Work Commission advocating for the retention of penalty rates. But the move was quickly seen as a political wedge with several new members of the Prime Minister’s ministerial team openly opposed to the existing penalty rate structures in the retail and hospitality sectors. Meanwhile there’s also internal Labor feuding over the future of frontbench Senator Kim Carr, who is threatening to split Labor’s left faction and form a small breakaway group and the right faction are at it too. Frontbencher Brendan O’Connor a member of the national left faction of the Labor Party from Victoria will be one of the key players to determine Senator Carr’s future as the Labor Caucus meets today. Bill Shorten is expected to name his Shadow Cabinet over the weekend. Good morning Mr O’Connor welcome back to Breakfast.
BRENDAN O’CONNOR, SHADOW MINISTER FOR EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE RELATIONS: Good morning, good to be here.
FANNING: Why should the Government think that Labor is doing anything but playing politics over this offer to put in a joint submission to the Fair Work Commission on penalty rates?
O’CONNOR: Look we’ve said we’d work constructively with the Government and here’s a case where the recommendations of the productivity commission that they commissioned recommended a cut to penalty rates, however, the Government before the election did not make a decision as to whether they supported that. At the same time, Labor actually put in a submission, for the first time ever, arguing against a cut to real income for low and middle income earners in those industries. And we think it’s proper that, particularly at a time where wage growth is at its lowest for a generation, that the Government support the opposition and oppose the cuts to penalty rates and they can do that by joining our support for preventing that cut.
FANNING: The Government has said that they will let the Fair Work Commission decide. Now in 2009 when the Fair Work Commission was created Julia Gillard, who was then the Workplace Relations Minister, said, “Fair Work Australia will be a defender of our society’s value of a fair go”. So, why not let them decide?
O’CONNOR: And we do support the Commission, but you’re able to made submissions which carry weight to determine what that Commission may decide. Now let’s remember, Malcolm Turnbull is very happy to -
FANNING: But are you confident to rely on the Commission?
O’CONNOR: We are the guardians of the independent umpire, we’re the guardians of Fair Work we support its work. But there’s no reason why, in fact within the Act there is a capacity for the Government to intervene and make submissions. Now what we believe and we said this before the election, that if we were elected we would’ve made submissions to oppose the cuts to real income for hospitality and retail workers and we don’t see why the Government cannot support us in this mission because we believe that if you take real income out of low and middle income earners in those industries it’s only going to reduce the likelihood of employment.
FANNING: Well, why bother with an independent umpire at all. Why not just let the politicians decide?
O’CONNOR: Well, that’s a very good point. Of course, Malcolm Turnbull doesn’t believe in independent umpires normally
FANNING: Do you, do you?
O’CONNOR: As you’ll remember, with the Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal, because he didn’t like the order made by that Tribunal, he abolished the Commission.
FANNING: You’re suggesting, to be fair, that both the major political parties put weight on the Commission by getting together and putting in a joint submission to influence the Fair Work Commission.
O’CONNOR: And argue the case, in defence not just of low paid workers, but also in defence of the economy - to take money out of the economy by cutting low and middle income earners wages - is the right argument. It’s the right thing to put forward, because if you take money out of the economy, there is less consumption. There is less likelihood of employment. We don’t think it’s good economically, we certainly know its bad for low income earners.
FANNING: That’s clearly the argument, that’s clearly the argument.
O’CONNOR: We can’t see why the Government can’t support that.
FANNING: Because it’s said that the Fair Work Commission will decide. This is an important question Mr O’Connor. The Fair Work Commissioners are appointed until they are 65. Now, as Australian’s know following the extraordinary events surrounding Michael Lawler who took 215 days sick leave from his $435 thousand a year job as the Commission’s Vice President -
O’CONNOR: He was appointed by Tony Abbott by the way -
FANNING: Before finally resigning. It does take a vote by both houses of Parliament to remove a Commissioner. So if you don’t have confidence in the Commission that’s what has to happen to remove a Commissioner.
Do you have confidence in them to do their job.
O’CONNOR: Firstly, with respect to Vice President Lawler, it was Labor that took that matter up because of his conduct during the course of his Commission. As for the submissions you can make to the Commission. In fact there is a capacity, there is provision within the Act, for the Government to make submissions on any matter in relation to the Commission. We believe a bipartisan submission to argue against cutting real wages of low income earners is a very good thing to do, and there is no reason why the Government shouldn’t take that up, unless, of course, they have an ideological predisposition to attacking low paid workers.
FANNING: Moving on, Kim Carr, Labor has its own internal problems with the future of Senator Carr. The real question is why should he be saved? If we’re to believe the leaks, national left bosses will not be voting for him. Does that include you?
O’CONNOR: If you believe the leaks. The Caucus determines the outcome of the frontbench and of course it does so working with the leader and the frontbench team. We’ll decide that today. Kim Carr has done a good job, a very good job in fact and so has many other frontbenchers. In fact I think one of the reasons we did so well in the election is we had a good team.
FANNING: You could save Senator Carr. You say he’s done a good job, will you save him?
O’CONNOR: What I’m saying to you – as you can hear – is that the Caucus makes these decisions. I believe Kim has done a good job, I think many of our frontbenchers have done a very good job.
FANNING: You’re a leader in the Caucus, I mean it’s not some amorphous group of people sitting in the corner, it’s you –
O’CONNOR: No, unlike the Liberal Party democracy reigns within the Labor Party. We have a decision to make and the decision will be made at 1pm and I believe Kim Carr along with many other frontbenchers have made a great contribution but it will be determined by the Caucus.
FANNING: And what will be your view?
O’CONNOR: Well I’ve just told you. I think Kim Carr has done a good job. I think many of our frontbench team –
FANNING: Sorry are you saying he should continue? I’m not very good at reading between the lines, you have to forgive me.
O’CONNOR: Well you don’t have to read between the lines.
FANNING: Are you going to save him or not? That’s all I want to know.
O’CONNOR: The determination of those things, unlike the Liberal Party, is determined by the collective, by the party room if you like, by the Caucus. I believe that decision should be made by the Caucus and we’ll see what happens at 1 o’clock. It’s not just about Kim Carr but any frontbencher. We have many, many people who are talented and capable of frontbench positions and I believe that will be determined fairly after the Caucus.
FANNING: Alright, Senator Carr wants to set up a new splinter faction on the left. The essence of the problem for the Labor Party is it isn’t a battle over good policy, he’s being seen by his faction as taking that move perhaps in an effort to protect his own patch if I don’t get a frontbench position you’ll get a split in the left.
O’CONNOR: As I say, people have every right to put themselves forward. Look, the Liberal Party has factions, groupings, so too does the Labor Party –
FANNING: Would that disappoint you as a leader in the left if there was a split in that way over a personality issue rather than a matter of principle?
O’CONNOR: Look, we have done a very good job in the election, we haven’t prevailed but we did a very good job and of course people have their right to argue their case and in fact that’s what every frontbench candidate does -
FANNING: But do they then have a right to say well if I don’t get what I want I’m going to take my bat and ball and go home -
O’CONNOR: Well inside the Caucus of course people have a right to say what they want. It’s determined by the Caucus. There is nothing outside the Caucus. It is determined within the party room. Let me tell you this – once it is determined, and it will be determined today, we will take the fight up to the government because we have to hold Malcolm Turnbull to account. He’s already talking about reneging on promises on superannuation and in all sorts of other policy areas we are seeing a reneging by Malcolm Turnbull. So the most important thing today is we will determine it by the Caucus, it will be determined, we will have a tough and effective frontbench team led by Bill Shorten and we will take the fight up to Malcolm Turnbull.
FANNING: Labor’s Cathy O’Toole won the federal Queensland seat of Herbert by eight votes, can you believe that, eight votes.
O’CONNOR: It’s a pretty tough game politics. I spoke to Cathy before -
FANNING: But it turns out Mr O’Connor there were a couple of dozen soldiers in Townsville who couldn’t vote that day because they were on exercise -
O’CONNOR: Well you read that in the newspaper. Let’s allow the electoral commission, the independent decision maker, to recount the votes. It’s very tough for anybody, it doesn’t matter what party they are from when a vote is so close. I think Cathy O’Toole would be a remarkable member for Herbert -
FANNING: Ewen Jones probably thinks he would be pretty good too, if those soldiers weren’t able to vote, is the only solution a new vote in Herbert?
O’CONNOR: Again I think it’s fair to say stop speculating on what did or did not happen and allow the independent institution that we have that count votes to determine the matter. I’m looking forward for Cathy O’Toole to be part of the Labor team. Let’s hope that happens, but that’s up to the electoral commission.
FANNING: Brendan O’Connor thanks for being the guest this morning.
O’CONNOR: Thanks very much Ellen.