Page 1888 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 14 June 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
proceeds with this legislation. They are issues which, if the Government takes them seriously into account, must result in significant amendment to this legislation. To attempt to force it through, over the objections of very large numbers of its own employees, for example, would be a foolhardy thing for the Government to do.
I will deal briefly with the issues. First of all, there are those issues that were raised by the Public Sector Union and the Trades and Labour Council. They are issues of great importance to the 23,000 people who are going to become subject to this legislation, if the Government has its way. The committee did not deal with those at great length because at the time the committee was conducting its hearings the PSU and the Trades and Labour Council were in negotiation with the Government on these issues and, of course, they ultimately found their way into the Industrial Relations Commission. We believed that, while they were matters of great moment, they were not matters the committee could seriously consider in that climate. It is interesting to note that the noise we heard outside this chamber earlier was not from crowds of people clamouring to have this Bill put into effect; it was from crowds of people clamouring not to have it put into effect. If that does not mean something to the Chief Minister and the members of the Government, I do not know what sort of impact is required.
We heard evidence from ACT Electricity and Water, both from management and from the professional officers, which suggested that there were very good reasons why, without serious consideration, that organisation should not be included, why the staff members of that organisation should not be brought under the provisions of this Bill. The Government apparently has not heard anything those people have said. They had not heard it before the Bill was tabled in the Assembly, and they obviously have had no intention of listening to it since the Bill was tabled in this Assembly. I even heard this morning the secretary of the electrical and plumbers union - also a significant organisation within ACTEW - adding his voice of objection to that organisation being included. Whom does the Government listen to? What were the consultation methods they used to find out what these people thought? The answer appears to be: None whatsoever. Yet we have a Bill we are expected to pass today or tomorrow and put into effect on 1 July. It is unacceptable. This Assembly simply cannot fall in behind the Government and allow this to occur.
We have heard argument from the Director of Public Prosecutions and from the Legal Aid Commission that they do not want their staff incorporated under the provisions of this Bill. Both of them have given us some amendments which, if incorporated by the Government into the Bill, would go some way to alleviating their concern. The question is: Has the Government listened? I suspect not. It was very interesting, particularly in the case of the Legal Aid Commission, that the day after officers came here and gave evidence to our committee the Chief Minister wrote to them and said, "We are prepared to talk to you about these issues". The response from the commissioner was quite interesting. He said, "Thank you very much for finally giving us an opportunity to let you know what we think". This was the day after they appeared and gave evidence to the committee. Why was the Government not talking to them before? The Director of Public Prosecutions intimates that virtually the same situation exists. They have been given no opportunity, they have been given no voice, and everything they have said has simply been brushed aside by the Government, as though it were of no consequence.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .