Mr ANOULACK CHANTHIVONG (Macquarie Fields) (18:47): I speak on the bill currently before the House, the Retail Trading Amendment (Boxing Day) Bill 2017. It took a short, four-page briefing note, three‑quarters of which was just blank space, with less than 400 words to show how much this Liberal-Nationals Government cares about the lives of those most adversely affected and how much it values a family's joy and happiness during the peak holiday season. The Government would have you believe that this bill is about giving people choice and that workers will "freely elect" to work on Boxing Day, to use their spin. They want us to simply accept that this bill gives retailers the choice of opening on Boxing Day and consumers the choice of starting their post-Christmas sales a day early.

Once again, the Government has conveniently overlooked a critical component in this debate: the workers themselves who will ultimately not have a choice. It is all well and good for the Government to bandy about the word "choice", but those of us who have loved ones or friends who work in retail know that there is an imbalance in power between management and staff. This imbalance also stretches to mum and dad small business operators who work on the premises of billion-dollar retail landlords. When management are the ones who hold the power to dominate rosters and assigned shifts, workers are left with little choice but to accept what they are given and saying "no" becomes impossible. Who would make the so-called choice to tell their employer that they are spending Boxing Day with their family and then risk unfavourable treatment when the next roster is being decided? The only choice under the circumstances is a highly pressured Hobson's choice with potentially adverse consequences for the worker's trading or working conditions.

This bill has a misplaced assumption that there is an equal balance in negotiation between employer and employee. We often talk about young people who are new to the workforce or low income earners who rely on every dollar for every shift to make ends meet. An employee negotiating with the employer has to consider the potential consequences for their employment not only on Boxing Day but on every other day in their future employment. This is not a standalone, one day independent decision, free of consequences. To think otherwise is terribly naive at best and empathetically insincere at worst.

Vulnerable employees do not always have a choice and do not have an equal footing to negotiate spending Boxing Day at home. In my electorate of Macquarie Fields, 3,072 people were employed in the retail industry during the most recently available 2011 Census. Nearly 30 per cent of these workers were aged between 15 and 24. That is nearly 4,000 families in my electorate that will be adversely affected by this bill and the Government's naive assumption that retail workers will be able to simply say no to the employer without fear of consequence. That is nearly 4,000 families that may not get the choice to spend Boxing Day together because a mum, dad, brother or sister has to work, and that is nearly 4,000 families the Government has thrown to the wolves in favour of profits for giant retailers.

Surely our community's wealth is better measured in fairness and the joy of valuable family time, not by someone being behind a counter for an extra day during the peak holiday season. When the latest figures for the 2016 Census are released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics later this month I expect the same will apply: thousands more families will have their choices taken away by this bill. The question has to be asked: Is it really that important for retailers and banks to be able to open their doors on Boxing Day? The bargains will still be there the next day and I am certain internet banking is readily available with little movement away from the couch. No-one is going to miss out on the post-Christmas sales if the doors stay closed on one day.

I know my colleagues on this side of the Chamber would agree with the message about spending quality time with family and friends. Equally, Boxing Day should be about family and community, not necessarily multi‑national profit. I speak in this Chamber today to tell the Government that the value of our society is not determined by the balance sheet of giant retailers. The value of society rests solely on the importance we place upon individuals in our community and their right to observe a handful of protected days in which work life does not impinge on family time.

I often spend early mornings at railway stations as people in my electorate bustle to work. Often it is dark and in winter it is extremely cold, but every time I am met with smiles and positive interaction, albeit briefly, as the hardworking people of my electorate deal with long commutes to work. Of course, there are days when the station platforms and trains are empty—Christmas Day, Easter Sunday and Good Friday. These days are the protected few I mentioned earlier. They are days when people can spend precious time with the people they love.

Another critical question I must ask is: When will it end? If this bill is passed, how long will it be before the Government comes after Christmas Day, Easter Sunday or Good Friday? How long before the solemn national tradition that is Anzac Day is ruined by shops opening their doors before 1.00 p.m.? These are currently restricted trading days under the Retail Trading Act 2008, but, as the Government has proved with this bill, nothing is sacred and nothing is safe. Should families in my electorate be prepared to spend Christmas Day away from their families? Should Easter egg hunts be run without mum or dad being able to watch their kids enjoy the wonder that is Easter Sunday? Should church services be scheduled for outside work hours to accommodate people rostered to work on what should be protected days?

These suggestions may seem farcical but, as this bill clearly demonstrates, anything is possible under this out-of-touch Government. If this bill truly were about choice for the consumer the Government would recognise that the retail environment has changed significantly in recent years. Online shopping can satisfy the retail needs of shoppers on Boxing Day—needs, I might add, that do not appear to be too great. There is no evidence that allowing shops to open on Boxing Day actually makes any positive contribution to the economy. In fact, it fails to account for the social and personal costs to all those involved, who feel pressured to work on Boxing Day, and the families who miss out because of their absence.

All it does is remove the choice of many retailers, who feel they do not have the power or the right to say no. Inserting some nice words regarding protection for workers about "freely elected to work" shows a poor understanding of the reality of the workplace and the negotiating power imbalance that exists. Further, it shows an entrenched indifference to the adverse impact on the lives of vulnerable employees—all through fewer than 400 words. They are the people who most need our support and understanding—not least. This bill will benefit giant multinational retailers while hurting the very people who keep their customers happy. It will disrupt families and further tip the balance of power in favour of employers. I cannot in all good conscience support a bill that has this adverse effect on the people I represent.