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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 11 Hansard (20 October) . . Page.. 3354 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

occasion I withdrew the legislation that I had before the Assembly, because I recognised the Federal Government's right to make laws that govern the actions of this Territory. It is unpalatable, but that is the way it is, and that is the way it ought to be.

It seems to me that our shadow spokesman on industrial relations, a former Minister for Industrial Relations, does not seem to know what happened to the legislation in 1996, or he is urging people to break that law. It is one or the other.

Mr Berry: I am urging them to be consistent.

MR MOORE: I cannot believe that Wayne Berry does not know what happened in 1996 with the Federal legislation. He has been involved in industrial relations either as a Minister or shadow Minister since this Assembly - - -

Mr Berry: I know exactly. I understand it like the back of my hand.

MR MOORE: I believe I am correct in saying that the whole time that this Assembly has existed, you have been either shadow Industrial Relations Minister or the Minister for Industrial Relations.

Mr Berry: Except for six months.

MR MOORE: Except for six months.

Mr Berry: No, no, no, longer than that. It was about two years.

MR MOORE: For a short period, but in the vast majority of time, and certainly over the last five years or so, that has been the case. He does know what happened. But he has here an opportunity to make a bit of political mileage, to demand of the Government that they take action which is clearly not legal.

Mr Berry: No offence. Not an offence.

MR MOORE: And he relies heavily on subsection 3 that Mr Stefaniak quoted. At that stage the contravention of subsection 1 or 2 is not an offence. If you read the legislation, it says, "Yes, well, it's not an offence". But we all know that Mr Berry is not a lawyer, and that his legal opinions are the legal opinions of a bush lawyer, the same level as mine. I do not claim to be a lawyer, but at least when I read the legislation I read on and see what else is there. I ask for advice from people qualified in the law, people with law degrees, and the verbal advice to me concerns the distinction between a criminal offence and a civil offence.

But let us put the legal part aside. How are we going to run industrial relations when there is an expectation that people will go on strike, take industrial action, and still get paid? It is an extraordinary notion that we pay people for refusing to go to work. It is a very serious matter. Now, there are times when people take strike action because they feel strongly about something. Indeed, I have advocated strike action when I was a teacher. I have to say it is very rare that teachers went out on strike, but it did happen

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