❓ Minister Buswell updates the house on Esperance port developments, highlighting lead clean-up progress, expansion opportunities, and criticising industrial action and the Prime Minister's industrial relations system.
AnsweredQoN 440Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
ESPERANCE PORT — PRIME MINISTER’S VISIT
I welcome the children and teachers from Castletown Primary School of Esperance who were in the public gallery a little earlier in question time. I notice that the Prime Minister will visit my electorate of Esperance and its port tomorrow. Can the minister please update the house on recent developments at the Esperance port and the messages he thinks that the Prime Minister might take away from her visit? Mr T.R. BUSWELL
I welcome the children and teachers from Castletown Primary School of Esperance who were in the public gallery a little earlier in question time. I notice that the Prime Minister will visit my electorate of Esperance and its port tomorrow. Can the minister please update the house on recent developments at the Esperance port and the messages he thinks that the Prime Minister might take away from her visit? Mr T.R. BUSWELL
AnswerView source ↗
I would like to thank the member very much for that question. The Prime Minister will be in Esperance tomorrow. I can hear the rumblings and feel the anticipation and excitement of her visit. The Esperance port is a very important piece of economic infrastructure. Last year, the Esperance port exported about 11 million tonnes of produce, just over nine million tonnes of iron ore, around 1.5 million tonnes of grain, some nickel and other things. There are three things about Esperance to report on and three messages that the Prime Minister can take away from her visit there. Firstly, under this government the Prime Minister is safe when she visits Esperance. The lead clean-up is progressing well. A Wittenoom-esque disaster was averted. The Prime Minister can attend Esperance safely and, along with residents, breathe that lovely clean air. The second issue is that the port of Esperance faces some exciting opportunities to expand. The port has the capacity to take another 20 million tonnes of iron ore. The port will play an important role in realising the resource potential of the Yilgarn iron ore precinct, which is very important. The port is engaged with the private sector to understand how it can deliver the port infrastructure to facilitate that trade. The state and commonwealth have invested about $130 million to upgrade the road and rail infrastructure to the port. Therefore, the second message for the Prime Minister to take away is that from Wyndham in the north to Esperance in the south, ports in Western Australia are playing important roles in facilitating resource expansion in Western Australia and, by extension, the economic growth that this country is enjoying. The third message is not a positive one, however, because the third issue that the port of Esperance has recently dealt with has been sustained industrial action by the Maritime Union of Australia under the trusty guidance of Mr Christy Cain. Between April and June the Maritime Union of Australia engaged in 10 one-day — Ms R. Saffioti : You haven’t done some union bashing for a while. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
I notice that the Prime Minister will visit my electorate of Esperance and its port tomorrow. Can the minister please update the house on recent developments at the Esperance port and the messages he thinks that the Prime Minister might take away from her visit? Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: I would like to thank the member very much for that question. The Prime Minister will be in Esperance tomorrow. I can hear the rumblings and feel the anticipation and excitement of her visit. The Esperance port is a very important piece of economic infrastructure. Last year, the Esperance port exported about 11 million tonnes of produce, just over nine million tonnes of iron ore, around 1.5 million tonnes of grain, some nickel and other things. There are three things about Esperance to report on and three messages that the Prime Minister can take away from her visit there. Firstly, under this government the Prime Minister is safe when she visits Esperance. The lead clean-up is progressing well. A Wittenoom-esque disaster was averted. The Prime Minister can attend Esperance safely and, along with residents, breathe that lovely clean air. The second issue is that the port of Esperance faces some exciting opportunities to expand. The port has the capacity to take another 20 million tonnes of iron ore. The port will play an important role in realising the resource potential of the Yilgarn iron ore precinct, which is very important. The port is engaged with the private sector to understand how it can deliver the port infrastructure to facilitate that trade. The state and commonwealth have invested about $130 million to upgrade the road and rail infrastructure to the port. Therefore, the second message for the Prime Minister to take away is that from Wyndham in the north to Esperance in the south, ports in Western Australia are playing important roles in facilitating resource expansion in Western Australia and, by extension, the economic growth that this country is enjoying. The third message is not a positive one, however, because the third issue that the port of Esperance has recently dealt with has been sustained industrial action by the Maritime Union of Australia under the trusty guidance of Mr Christy Cain. Between April and June the Maritime Union of Australia engaged in 10 one-day — Ms R. Saffioti : You haven’t done some union bashing for a while. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: I would like to thank the member very much for that question. The Prime Minister will be in Esperance tomorrow. I can hear the rumblings and feel the anticipation and excitement of her visit. The Esperance port is a very important piece of economic infrastructure. Last year, the Esperance port exported about 11 million tonnes of produce, just over nine million tonnes of iron ore, around 1.5 million tonnes of grain, some nickel and other things. There are three things about Esperance to report on and three messages that the Prime Minister can take away from her visit there. Firstly, under this government the Prime Minister is safe when she visits Esperance. The lead clean-up is progressing well. A Wittenoom-esque disaster was averted. The Prime Minister can attend Esperance safely and, along with residents, breathe that lovely clean air. The second issue is that the port of Esperance faces some exciting opportunities to expand. The port has the capacity to take another 20 million tonnes of iron ore. The port will play an important role in realising the resource potential of the Yilgarn iron ore precinct, which is very important. The port is engaged with the private sector to understand how it can deliver the port infrastructure to facilitate that trade. The state and commonwealth have invested about $130 million to upgrade the road and rail infrastructure to the port. Therefore, the second message for the Prime Minister to take away is that from Wyndham in the north to Esperance in the south, ports in Western Australia are playing important roles in facilitating resource expansion in Western Australia and, by extension, the economic growth that this country is enjoying. The third message is not a positive one, however, because the third issue that the port of Esperance has recently dealt with has been sustained industrial action by the Maritime Union of Australia under the trusty guidance of Mr Christy Cain. Between April and June the Maritime Union of Australia engaged in 10 one-day — Ms R. Saffioti : You haven’t done some union bashing for a while. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
I would like to thank the member very much for that question. The Prime Minister will be in Esperance tomorrow. I can hear the rumblings and feel the anticipation and excitement of her visit. The Esperance port is a very important piece of economic infrastructure. Last year, the Esperance port exported about 11 million tonnes of produce, just over nine million tonnes of iron ore, around 1.5 million tonnes of grain, some nickel and other things. There are three things about Esperance to report on and three messages that the Prime Minister can take away from her visit there. Firstly, under this government the Prime Minister is safe when she visits Esperance. The lead clean-up is progressing well. A Wittenoom-esque disaster was averted. The Prime Minister can attend Esperance safely and, along with residents, breathe that lovely clean air. The second issue is that the port of Esperance faces some exciting opportunities to expand. The port has the capacity to take another 20 million tonnes of iron ore. The port will play an important role in realising the resource potential of the Yilgarn iron ore precinct, which is very important. The port is engaged with the private sector to understand how it can deliver the port infrastructure to facilitate that trade. The state and commonwealth have invested about $130 million to upgrade the road and rail infrastructure to the port. Therefore, the second message for the Prime Minister to take away is that from Wyndham in the north to Esperance in the south, ports in Western Australia are playing important roles in facilitating resource expansion in Western Australia and, by extension, the economic growth that this country is enjoying. The third message is not a positive one, however, because the third issue that the port of Esperance has recently dealt with has been sustained industrial action by the Maritime Union of Australia under the trusty guidance of Mr Christy Cain. Between April and June the Maritime Union of Australia engaged in 10 one-day — Ms R. Saffioti : You haven’t done some union bashing for a while. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
There are three things about Esperance to report on and three messages that the Prime Minister can take away from her visit there. Firstly, under this government the Prime Minister is safe when she visits Esperance. The lead clean-up is progressing well. A Wittenoom-esque disaster was averted. The Prime Minister can attend Esperance safely and, along with residents, breathe that lovely clean air. The second issue is that the port of Esperance faces some exciting opportunities to expand. The port has the capacity to take another 20 million tonnes of iron ore. The port will play an important role in realising the resource potential of the Yilgarn iron ore precinct, which is very important. The port is engaged with the private sector to understand how it can deliver the port infrastructure to facilitate that trade. The state and commonwealth have invested about $130 million to upgrade the road and rail infrastructure to the port. Therefore, the second message for the Prime Minister to take away is that from Wyndham in the north to Esperance in the south, ports in Western Australia are playing important roles in facilitating resource expansion in Western Australia and, by extension, the economic growth that this country is enjoying. The third message is not a positive one, however, because the third issue that the port of Esperance has recently dealt with has been sustained industrial action by the Maritime Union of Australia under the trusty guidance of Mr Christy Cain. Between April and June the Maritime Union of Australia engaged in 10 one-day — Ms R. Saffioti : You haven’t done some union bashing for a while. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
The second issue is that the port of Esperance faces some exciting opportunities to expand. The port has the capacity to take another 20 million tonnes of iron ore. The port will play an important role in realising the resource potential of the Yilgarn iron ore precinct, which is very important. The port is engaged with the private sector to understand how it can deliver the port infrastructure to facilitate that trade. The state and commonwealth have invested about $130 million to upgrade the road and rail infrastructure to the port. Therefore, the second message for the Prime Minister to take away is that from Wyndham in the north to Esperance in the south, ports in Western Australia are playing important roles in facilitating resource expansion in Western Australia and, by extension, the economic growth that this country is enjoying. The third message is not a positive one, however, because the third issue that the port of Esperance has recently dealt with has been sustained industrial action by the Maritime Union of Australia under the trusty guidance of Mr Christy Cain. Between April and June the Maritime Union of Australia engaged in 10 one-day — Ms R. Saffioti : You haven’t done some union bashing for a while. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
The third message is not a positive one, however, because the third issue that the port of Esperance has recently dealt with has been sustained industrial action by the Maritime Union of Australia under the trusty guidance of Mr Christy Cain. Between April and June the Maritime Union of Australia engaged in 10 one-day — Ms R. Saffioti : You haven’t done some union bashing for a while. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Ms R. Saffioti : You haven’t done some union bashing for a while. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
[See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
I notice that the Prime Minister will visit my electorate of Esperance and its port tomorrow. Can the minister please update the house on recent developments at the Esperance port and the messages he thinks that the Prime Minister might take away from her visit? Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: I would like to thank the member very much for that question. The Prime Minister will be in Esperance tomorrow. I can hear the rumblings and feel the anticipation and excitement of her visit. The Esperance port is a very important piece of economic infrastructure. Last year, the Esperance port exported about 11 million tonnes of produce, just over nine million tonnes of iron ore, around 1.5 million tonnes of grain, some nickel and other things. There are three things about Esperance to report on and three messages that the Prime Minister can take away from her visit there. Firstly, under this government the Prime Minister is safe when she visits Esperance. The lead clean-up is progressing well. A Wittenoom-esque disaster was averted. The Prime Minister can attend Esperance safely and, along with residents, breathe that lovely clean air. The second issue is that the port of Esperance faces some exciting opportunities to expand. The port has the capacity to take another 20 million tonnes of iron ore. The port will play an important role in realising the resource potential of the Yilgarn iron ore precinct, which is very important. The port is engaged with the private sector to understand how it can deliver the port infrastructure to facilitate that trade. The state and commonwealth have invested about $130 million to upgrade the road and rail infrastructure to the port. Therefore, the second message for the Prime Minister to take away is that from Wyndham in the north to Esperance in the south, ports in Western Australia are playing important roles in facilitating resource expansion in Western Australia and, by extension, the economic growth that this country is enjoying. The third message is not a positive one, however, because the third issue that the port of Esperance has recently dealt with has been sustained industrial action by the Maritime Union of Australia under the trusty guidance of Mr Christy Cain. Between April and June the Maritime Union of Australia engaged in 10 one-day — Ms R. Saffioti : You haven’t done some union bashing for a while. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: I would like to thank the member very much for that question. The Prime Minister will be in Esperance tomorrow. I can hear the rumblings and feel the anticipation and excitement of her visit. The Esperance port is a very important piece of economic infrastructure. Last year, the Esperance port exported about 11 million tonnes of produce, just over nine million tonnes of iron ore, around 1.5 million tonnes of grain, some nickel and other things. There are three things about Esperance to report on and three messages that the Prime Minister can take away from her visit there. Firstly, under this government the Prime Minister is safe when she visits Esperance. The lead clean-up is progressing well. A Wittenoom-esque disaster was averted. The Prime Minister can attend Esperance safely and, along with residents, breathe that lovely clean air. The second issue is that the port of Esperance faces some exciting opportunities to expand. The port has the capacity to take another 20 million tonnes of iron ore. The port will play an important role in realising the resource potential of the Yilgarn iron ore precinct, which is very important. The port is engaged with the private sector to understand how it can deliver the port infrastructure to facilitate that trade. The state and commonwealth have invested about $130 million to upgrade the road and rail infrastructure to the port. Therefore, the second message for the Prime Minister to take away is that from Wyndham in the north to Esperance in the south, ports in Western Australia are playing important roles in facilitating resource expansion in Western Australia and, by extension, the economic growth that this country is enjoying. The third message is not a positive one, however, because the third issue that the port of Esperance has recently dealt with has been sustained industrial action by the Maritime Union of Australia under the trusty guidance of Mr Christy Cain. Between April and June the Maritime Union of Australia engaged in 10 one-day — Ms R. Saffioti : You haven’t done some union bashing for a while. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
I would like to thank the member very much for that question. The Prime Minister will be in Esperance tomorrow. I can hear the rumblings and feel the anticipation and excitement of her visit. The Esperance port is a very important piece of economic infrastructure. Last year, the Esperance port exported about 11 million tonnes of produce, just over nine million tonnes of iron ore, around 1.5 million tonnes of grain, some nickel and other things. There are three things about Esperance to report on and three messages that the Prime Minister can take away from her visit there. Firstly, under this government the Prime Minister is safe when she visits Esperance. The lead clean-up is progressing well. A Wittenoom-esque disaster was averted. The Prime Minister can attend Esperance safely and, along with residents, breathe that lovely clean air. The second issue is that the port of Esperance faces some exciting opportunities to expand. The port has the capacity to take another 20 million tonnes of iron ore. The port will play an important role in realising the resource potential of the Yilgarn iron ore precinct, which is very important. The port is engaged with the private sector to understand how it can deliver the port infrastructure to facilitate that trade. The state and commonwealth have invested about $130 million to upgrade the road and rail infrastructure to the port. Therefore, the second message for the Prime Minister to take away is that from Wyndham in the north to Esperance in the south, ports in Western Australia are playing important roles in facilitating resource expansion in Western Australia and, by extension, the economic growth that this country is enjoying. The third message is not a positive one, however, because the third issue that the port of Esperance has recently dealt with has been sustained industrial action by the Maritime Union of Australia under the trusty guidance of Mr Christy Cain. Between April and June the Maritime Union of Australia engaged in 10 one-day — Ms R. Saffioti : You haven’t done some union bashing for a while. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
There are three things about Esperance to report on and three messages that the Prime Minister can take away from her visit there. Firstly, under this government the Prime Minister is safe when she visits Esperance. The lead clean-up is progressing well. A Wittenoom-esque disaster was averted. The Prime Minister can attend Esperance safely and, along with residents, breathe that lovely clean air. The second issue is that the port of Esperance faces some exciting opportunities to expand. The port has the capacity to take another 20 million tonnes of iron ore. The port will play an important role in realising the resource potential of the Yilgarn iron ore precinct, which is very important. The port is engaged with the private sector to understand how it can deliver the port infrastructure to facilitate that trade. The state and commonwealth have invested about $130 million to upgrade the road and rail infrastructure to the port. Therefore, the second message for the Prime Minister to take away is that from Wyndham in the north to Esperance in the south, ports in Western Australia are playing important roles in facilitating resource expansion in Western Australia and, by extension, the economic growth that this country is enjoying. The third message is not a positive one, however, because the third issue that the port of Esperance has recently dealt with has been sustained industrial action by the Maritime Union of Australia under the trusty guidance of Mr Christy Cain. Between April and June the Maritime Union of Australia engaged in 10 one-day — Ms R. Saffioti : You haven’t done some union bashing for a while. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
The second issue is that the port of Esperance faces some exciting opportunities to expand. The port has the capacity to take another 20 million tonnes of iron ore. The port will play an important role in realising the resource potential of the Yilgarn iron ore precinct, which is very important. The port is engaged with the private sector to understand how it can deliver the port infrastructure to facilitate that trade. The state and commonwealth have invested about $130 million to upgrade the road and rail infrastructure to the port. Therefore, the second message for the Prime Minister to take away is that from Wyndham in the north to Esperance in the south, ports in Western Australia are playing important roles in facilitating resource expansion in Western Australia and, by extension, the economic growth that this country is enjoying. The third message is not a positive one, however, because the third issue that the port of Esperance has recently dealt with has been sustained industrial action by the Maritime Union of Australia under the trusty guidance of Mr Christy Cain. Between April and June the Maritime Union of Australia engaged in 10 one-day — Ms R. Saffioti : You haven’t done some union bashing for a while. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
The third message is not a positive one, however, because the third issue that the port of Esperance has recently dealt with has been sustained industrial action by the Maritime Union of Australia under the trusty guidance of Mr Christy Cain. Between April and June the Maritime Union of Australia engaged in 10 one-day — Ms R. Saffioti : You haven’t done some union bashing for a while. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Ms R. Saffioti : You haven’t done some union bashing for a while. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am assuming that the member supports the Maritime Union of Australia and its 10 strikes at the Esperance port. Those 10 strikes meant that the port was shut for 216 hours and the total work hours lost were 4 152. I am keen to understand whether members opposite support the behaviour of the union. Of course, I assume that they do. We estimate that as a result of those strikes we lost 260 000 tonnes of iron ore exports through the port, which could potentially have cost Cliffs Natural Resources up to $40 million in lost exports. As the member for Eyre is aware—because we spoke about this—the real shame in all this is that the port was powerless to take any action against the Maritime Union of Australia because of Julia Gillard’s industrial relations system. The port was powerless because the action was protected industrial action and the union could not be forced to arbitration. Therefore, the third message for Julia Gillard to take away is that her industrial relations system threatens the economic development of Western Australia. It is not only the port authorities of Western Australia that are being bent over the barrel; it is also private companies the length and breadth of Western Australia, the latest one being Patrick Stevedores. I must tell members that the MUA uses tactics that are very unsavoury. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I am glad that the Labor Party supports the MUA. I am very happy that it does. I can see the nodding heads over there—the paid noddies. The MUA engages in very unsavoury tactics. The MUA will slowly pick off other port authorities in Western Australia. I have a suspicion that in the not-too-distant future the MUA will shut down the port of Fremantle, but only a day at a time so that we are powerless to stop it under Julia Gillard’s industrial relations regime. Let me say this: I want to leave the house with an example of the sort of behaviour that the MUA exposes its employers to. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : This is the sort of action that Julia Gillard endorses by extension. This is the sort of action that the opposition endorses and this is the sort of action that employers, including government ports the length and breadth of Western Australia, are being subjected to. I want to table this email from Mr Christy Cain, branch secretary and national vice-president of the Maritime Union of Australia, Kwong Alley, North Fremantle. [See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
[See paper 3741.] Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Mr Cain sent this email to an executive of a national stevedoring company. It provides an interesting insight into the sort of behaviour that the Julia Gillard industrial system supports and condones in Western Australia. I will read only part of it because I dare not read the rest into Hansard . This email was written in a modern, contemporary industrial relations environment. The email reads — You are one two faced little maggot, who I wouldn’t — We will use the word “urinate” — on if you were on fire. One lying little maggot, who has no standing in this industry. Our members, understand that there are jobs on the line on occasions, and it doesn’t help when you do back yard deals (like in port headland AWU), to keep the MUA out. This is the sort of behaviour experienced by employers, including port authorities in Western Australia, and this is not even over a wages negotiation. This is about a dispute over who gets to cover workers in a port. I think when Julia Gillard goes down to Esperance tomorrow, she needs to answer questions on why she condones, by extension, this sort of behaviour and these sorts of threats on ports in Western Australia. The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
The messages she will take away from her visit to Esperance are that it is safe in Esperance and Esperance is playing an important role in growing the state’s economy, but the industrial relations system that she is subjecting both government and private sector employers to in the maritime industry in this state threatens the very substance of the economic growth of Western Australia and, by extension, the very substance of the economic growth that she is so proud to trumpet for Australia.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.