Mr ROBB (Goldstein—Minister for Trade and Investment) (12:56): What a sad contribution from the Leader of the Opposition, given the significance of what is being debated here today. He was just parroting a lot of union propositions. The Leader of the Opposition said this morning on ABC radio: But I didn't become a Member of Parliament just to become a rubber stamp for Tony Abbott. He said: Imagine if in the last two years of the Abbott Government the Opposition just rolled over and said tickle us on the tummy … Perish the thought! He continued: We've got very clear propositions— which he then put to us by way of an amendment today. Mr Mitchell interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for McEwen is interjecting outside of his place in the chamber. Mr ROBB: The sad thing is that all of the propositions in the amendment have been debated, discussed and examined for weeks on end and there has been no substance found in any of those propositions—not one of those propositions. No-one except those opposite and the CFMEU supports any of the propositions that you are saying are weaknesses of this agreement—not one person. It is fair to say that, if you did have propositions which were questioned by people other than the CFMEU legitimately— Mr Champion interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Wakefield is interjecting out of his place in the chamber. Mr ROBB: Not one person except the CFMEU. If you did have legitimate propositions there would be a case for negotiation. When you come up with something of substance we will think about the proposition of negotiation. There is nothing to negotiate. You have brought up nothing to be negotiated—nothing. You just went on with a lot of drivel again today. You have not looked at the arguments. You have not looked at the propositions. I can confirm this. I confirm that you are being led by the nose—because what fell into my hands this morning? Opposition members interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order on my left! Mr ROBB: It was leaked by someone on the other side—one of many I suspect who are totally embarrassed by the way in which your leadership is carrying your party in this debate. They are totally embarrassed by your leadership. So we get leaked, from one of many of you who are embarrassed, the CFMEU written instructions. You have got them all there in your back pockets. You have them there; pull them out. He pulled them out this morning. So what does the CFMEU say? An opposition member interjecting— Mr ROBB: Listen if you want to learn something, you ignoramus! The CFMEU says: Under EMAs— That is, enterprise migration agreements, the agreements on which we based the IFAs, the investment facilitation agreements— Ms Butler interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Hon. BC Scott ): The member for Griffith is out of her place in this chamber. Mr ROBB: It says: Under EMAs, the project proponent at least had to produce a 'labour market analysis' showing detailed projected shortages to justify upfront the need for 'concessional' 457 visa … IFAs will be approved with no upfront or subsequent requirement to demonstrate projected shortages of Australian workers. … … … There is no mandatory obligation for direct employers on IFA projects to undertake Labour Market Testing (LMT). That was at the heart of the major request and concern of the Leader of the Opposition today. He repeated it on radio this morning. He pulled out his speaking notes and repeated it on radio this morning. But let us look at what went out to business in May this year. Ms Butler interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Griffith, you are disorderly. You are out of your place in this chamber and interjecting. Mr ROBB: These instructions are associated with projects of over $150 million. The department of immigration, the authority that you used for the EMAs, wrote this. What does it say? About IFAs, it says: Evidence of your domestic recruitment efforts should include details, for each requested occupation, of advertising undertaken within the past six months, including the period the job was advertised; the number of applicants who were hired; and reasons why other applicants were unsuccessful; or provide other compelling evidence of why no suitable Australian workers are available. That looks to me like labour market testing. A government member: It is labour market testing. Mr ROBB: That is labour market testing. If it looks like it, if it says what it is, it is it. That is mandatory. In the EMAs, it was not mandatory. Mr Conroy interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Charlton is disorderly. Mr ROBB: The only thing was labour market analysis. You have been stooged by the CFMEU and you have not bothered to even check the formal arrangements. It is a con. You know it is a con. There is nothing to debate. There is nothing to change. Get on with this. If you dump this agreement, this will affect our relationship not just economically but in a much wider sense. The damage you will do will be monumental.