Thanking you Deputy Speaker. I congratulate the Senate crossbench, particularly senators Pocock and Lambie, for ensuring that the mammoth Fair Work Legislation (Closing the Loopholes Bill is split. This bill has positive changes providing clearer rules around small business insolvencies, simplifies compensation for first responders, expands the Asbestos Safety and Eradication Agency and improves protections for employees subjected to family and domestic violence. I support these elements of the bill as I supported attempts to have these elements passed through the House when they came here as private senators' bills. I don't want to see schedule 1 (7) in the bill we're passing today, expanding union powers. The government knows this part of the bill is controversial. When we debated the omnibus bill in the house, I spoke and proposed amendments to ensure the bill goes no further than closing loopholes. In my second reading speech, I noticed there were some instances in which the expansion of union powers went further than required to close the loophole. An example of this has reappeared in the bill. By including Division 2 of part 7, this bill introduces a series of new rights for union delegates employed in workplaces. I note there's no limit on the number of union delegates permitted within a workplace. Additional benefits for delegates include uncapped time off for union training, making employers engage with delegates on any matter they wish to raise, even when the matters are fanciful or unrepresentative of the priorities of a majority of employee employees on site, allowing unions demand their delegates be given subsidised access to various benefits and inserting union delegate terms into all modern awards and agreements. In effect, these provisions give union delegates preferential treatment over other employees and the case has not been made for these changes. They've not backed by any identified problem to be solved, or specific difficulties experienced by delegates which couldn't be addressed by working with employers or using the enterprise bargaining system. That is why I support the member for Wentworth's amendment to limit the increased union powers. I would encourage the coalition to support that amendment, too, and act on according to principle, not according to politiking. I am also very concerned about the inclusion of part 6 relating to labour hire. The government says it is closing a loophole that allows business to engage labour hire providers in order to save costs by paying these contractors less than employees being paid the same to do the same job. I agree this is bad practice. And throughout all of our briefings and discussions, it seems clear this change is aimed at certain businesses and labour hire companies. I'm glad to see that service contractors have now been excluded from this change which I spoke about a few weeks ago, although the process is still cumbersome and difficult. I still have concerns about the additional complexity created by this, and the potential impact on employers beyond the two or three employers at which the government says this legislation is aimed. These changes still add complexity to an already complex framework. The additional admin burden for labour hire and host employers as they try to wade throug EBA's and previous agreements as they try to find the correct rate of pay adds yet another degree of difficulty. There is a risk that this change affects competitiveness and productivity as pointed out by numerous business and industry groups today. I especially am concerned for my state of Western Australia and the potential impact on the mining industry. I would prefer to wait until after the Senate inquiry is complete to debate these changes. They are significant and they deserve proper scrutiny. Pushing this change through prior to the Senate inquiry doesn't send the right message about the government's willingness to hear reasonable voices and fully understand the consequences of these big changes. Removing the parts of the bill relating to delegate rights and labour hire, as per the coalition's amendment, would address my concerns and allow me to vote in favour of this bill. The combination of overreach, driven by union interests, and lack of scrutiny by the committee process in relation to labour hire means that despite being supportive of some parts of the bill, I'm not able to support it in its entirety in its current form.