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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 10 Hansard (25 September) . . Page.. 3321 ..

MR KAINE (continuing):

It is simply untrue to say, as Mr Berry is attempting to say, that we have taken a position. We have not. I can only say that the proof of the pudding will be in the eating. When the submission goes to the AIRC, Mr Berry will be able to see for himself the nature of that submission and the matters that it covers, and he will be able to establish that, as the Chief Minister and I said yesterday and say again today, that submission will not take a position one way or the other on the matter but will be simply an information document.

MR CORBELL (3.58): Mr Speaker, it is quite clear that the Government have enormous problems with supporting an application in the Industrial Relations Commission that allows for a common rule to be applied to people who would be covered under the so-called SACS award. They have a very clear problem with that. Some people have argued that this is a technicality. I say that it is not a technicality. You only have to look at what the ACT Government says in its "notice of appearance to object to an application for common rule". It says:

Many of the community service organisations are reliant upon ACT Government budgetary assistance to provide part or all of their ongoing funds. Application of common rule may threaten the viability of these community organisations and the services they provide to the community through the mandatory application of this award across the Territory.

Why would the application of the common rule threaten the viability of these community organisations? It would do so only if the Government was unwilling to fund it.

Mrs Carnell: We said that yesterday.

MR CORBELL: Yes, you did say that yesterday. You are absolutely right, Chief Minister. It is quite clear that the Government really does not want to fund these organisations. It is not prepared to fund these organisations to pay workers in these organisations fair wages, which is what the common rule is all about. What has occurred? In their objection to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission they are saying, "These organisations will not necessarily be funded by the ACT Government, so we would prefer it if you did not implement the award". That is what they are saying. That is what the notice of objection is all about. That is what it is saying.

I know that the Government will say otherwise, but they have been caught out on this issue. They are uncomfortable with the process that asks the Australian Industrial Relations Commission to approve a common rule for people in community organisations to be paid fair wages. They are uncomfortable because they would have to fund it. They know they do not want to fund it, so they want to try to convince the Industrial Relations Commission not to approve a common rule. That is what that notice of appearance to object is all about.

Mrs Carnell: No, it is not.

MR CORBELL: That is what it is all about. The Chief Minister and the Minister for Industrial Relations yesterday made some very clear, unequivocal statements. Mr Kaine said:

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