Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 3 Hansard (10 April) . . Page.. 891 ..

MRS CARNELL: Mr Berry laughs; but we have always taken the approach, with the Greens and with others in this place, that we do not push through pieces of legislation that do have ramifications, without giving all people in this Assembly an opportunity to have time to look at them, and to look at them properly.

Mr Berry: You would laugh if you looked in the mirror and saw yourself.

MRS CARNELL: No; I am sure that is what you do, Mr Berry. Anyway, Mr Speaker, it is clear from the timing of this amendment and the general thrust of the Bill that there is a correlation, shall we say, with the Government's intention to introduce new employment arrangements under the LA(MS) Act for LA(MS) Act staff. The Government is still committed to introducing the new arrangements on 1 July 1997 and is continuing to work through all of the issues raised in face-to-face briefings with all members and also in writing from members. Feedback will be provided when the Government has had the opportunity to consider its position.

Mr Berry: Yes, no change in the Government's position.

MRS CARNELL: That is not necessarily true. In fact, Mr Speaker, it is very interesting that, when those opposite asked us to put off the implementation date because it was too soon and they did not have time to respond, we said, "Fine; we will put it off". Mr Berry was away; so it was a bit hard. We said, "Okay. We understand that people need time to respond. We understand that people need time to come to grips with this situation".

Mr Berry: I do not remember this discussion.

MRS CARNELL: Your staff did, though. We moved the implementation date from 1 March to 1 July because we understood that everybody needed time to have a look at this whole issue and to input into this issue.

Mr Whitecross: To get used to it.

MRS CARNELL: Mr Whitecross obviously is confident that he will be able to make these changes. Obviously, the Bill would not have been introduced if he did not have the numbers in this area. I believe that, as usual, he has not looked below the surface of what is presented here.

Is Mr Whitecross aware that he is attempting to make determinations, arrangements and conditions by which members employ staff disallowable? I assume so. Is he aware that by making arrangements disallowable he is providing the opportunity for the Assembly to disallow or alter the staff salary allocations made to members to employ staff? I assume so. Has he considered the effects on MLAs that this uncertainty about their allocation could cause? Staff could find themselves engaged on the basis of a staff salary allocation which may subsequently change without consultation with or explanation to any person involved. Has he considered the effects on staff that this uncertainty could cause?

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .