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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 6 Hansard (2 September) . . Page.. 1778 ..

MR BERRY (continuing):

That is contrary to what was promised to the unions as well. This goes on and on. The media release continues:

Similarly, if the parties agree to different processes or time frames for steps under the RRR Award, then that is fine too.

That is consistent with the provision in the existing enterprise bargaining agreement, but that is about the only consistency that I could find. The media release goes on to say:

Mrs Carnell said that in cases where a staff agreement (ie, a non-union agreement) was being developed, an independent panel would be appointed to ensure that any employee with a particular concern had the opportunity to access independent, experienced advice and moderation.

That is in breach of the promise given to the unions because - - -

Ms Carnell: No, it is not.

MR BERRY: Yes, it is in breach. It is in clear breach. It is in contempt of the promise that was made to the unions. You made it clear, had you been listening to the debate, that the parties would be the ones that would make decisions in relation to whether or not a further agreement in relation to redundancy was required pursuant to Part 4.1J of the principles and objectives.

Ms Carnell: Why would the unions have veto in a non-union agreement?

MR BERRY: Mr Speaker, Ms Carnell is disingenuous when she now says, "Well, what about if it is a non-union agreement?".

Ms Carnell: Why would the unions have veto in a non-union agreement?

MR BERRY: The promise that you made to the unions before the election was made abundantly clear when you said, "All EBAs will have included in them the existing provisions".

Ms Carnell: That are done with the union, yes. No problems. Not ones that are not done with unions.

MR BERRY: I will read it to you again just to make it sure.

Ms Carnell: It is all right. Nobody is even interested.

MR BERRY: You said:

The Carnell Government has always made it clear that the Liberals will allow redundancies only if the workload goes. They have never supported job loss alone.

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