The Rudd Government and SME's

Evans: The biggest problem for retailers is the issue of staff and the availability of skilled staff. There is no policy articulated that will alleviate that problem and it seems no government has seriously addressed the issue for some time. Skilled staff is a little more than technical training, it is more to do with career choice and workplace advantages, and although industry associations advise governments about the needs of the workplace it seems these requests are ignored. Issues such as broadband access for small business, compliance management, education for new business operators, are issues that small business operators worry about. And yet, governments tend not to be concerned. So when the Government legislates its climate change reforms, it should consider the burden of small business who will be required to manage most of the change.

Gahan: No doubt these three issues are going to be the signature issues of the Rudd Government’s first term. I would also nominate infrastructure investment, public health and, possibly, an attempt to re-establish a workable framework for state-federal government relations, which should facilitate more harmonious regulatory arrangements.

Hourn: I’d target the economy, health care, and national security. Interest rate rises, rising inflation, and the effects of the US sub-prime market are major concerns. Middle Australia is now super sensitive to higher mortgage payments. The Government needs to win business confidence, but business is suspicious of Labor’s workplace reforms. The Government is already addressing state funding for health, amid concerns about whether enough money is being pumped in. As for national security, the Government needs to strike a balance between legitimate threats and scare mongering. Cases such as David Hicks and Dr Mohamed Haneef have left many Australians concerned about erosion of freedoms.

What needs to happen with Labor’s workplace relations policy to ensure business is no worse off?

Gahan: There are six (not 10!) commandments to ensure the new workplace relations policy works for business. First, it needs to ensure a painless transition from the current to the new system. It also requires some consideration of how best to deal with many thousands of agreements that are likely to remain stuck in the fairness test limbo after the transition arrangements take effect. This could hit small business particularly hard. Second, the policy must address the issue of award modernisation. Awards—and how they relate to minimum pay scales—remain too complex and difficult for the average punter to work out. Third, the Government needs to think very carefully about unfair dismissal provisions. The Government’s IR policy is unlikely to be a well received if it chooses to return to the pre-existing arrangements, which proved costly and open to abuse. Fourth, the highly complex and legalistic Work Choices legislation needs to be simplified and written in plain English. Fifth, while the Work Choices policy allowed too much room for rogue employer behaviour, the new framework must also ensure that responsibility for IR remains at the workplace level. Finally, it must deal with the Fairness Test mess. This can be achieved if the new arrangements make protected minimum entitlements unnegotiable, but then allow for greater flexibility and scope above these entitlements without the need to make reference to a complex web of award regulation.

MacDonald: We want to work with the Government on its new workplace relations agenda. I recognise that the Government was in part elected because of community concerns over WorkChoices and the Federal Opposition (who control the Senate) have said WorkChoices is dead. What we have to do is ensure that the changes ensure our workplaces can continue to be productive and efficient. To the credit of the Government, they are moving slowly and are consulting widely. Equally important is for state governments to actively co-operate with their federal colleagues in creating a single set of national industrial relations rules rather than the current confusing dual federal and state systems.

Edwards: They need to insist upon—as far as possible—retaining a national system that was created by the Howard govt. And I think they’re committed to that. They need to insist that arbitration remains confined to national minimum rates. And as far as I know they will insist upon that. Although they will certainly eliminate individual statutory contracts they will come good on their undertaking to provide substitute arrangements, for example flexibility clauses in awards. I think this is what they will do within the timeframe under which those individual contracts will be eliminated.