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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 6 Hansard (15 June) . . Page.. 1837 ..

Mr Moore: I take a point of order, Mr Speaker. Mr Berry cannot accuse anybody of lying unless he does so by way of a substantive motion.

MR SPEAKER: Withdraw that remark, please, Mr Berry.

Mr Berry: I withdraw it, with the greatest reluctance.

MR SPEAKER: Thank you.

Leave granted.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I will be quite brief. I want to make a few comments. First of all, Mr Corbell is wrong to say that by accepting this determination today we will oust the jurisdiction of the industrial commission. Mr Kaine is right about that. This determination sets a floor. The commission can decide that a higher amount should be the no-disadvantage test, so that is perfectly possible today. All we are doing is setting a floor, but the floor can be raised.

I have some information about the different rates of pay under these two awards. Mr Speaker, the clerks award was chosen for no particular reason, except that it was an award applicable to people in clerical positions. Whether people who work in this building are closer to clerks or to journalists, I do not really care to enter into. My department chose an award which seemed to be a reasonable basis on which to set the minimum level, the floor, for this arrangement.

I will give a comparison between the different rates of pay, as I understand these documents. The minimum rate of pay for the lowest grade under the clerks award would be $439.60 per week. The minimum rate of pay under the journalists award would be just under $600 a week. We have put forward a suggestion in our determination here. If members do not like it, they have the power under the Subordinate Laws Act to amend the instrument by putting a different award in that document as the base, which, as I have said, can then be changed again by the industrial commission if that is the view of the industrial commission. We felt that was an appropriate minimum award; $439 a week for an employee here seemed like a reasonable base below which nobody could go. Mr Berry says, in effect, that it should be $600 per week.

Ms Tucker says that we should have put our case. No case was made against the clerks award in this debate. Mr Berry simply said that it was not the appropriate award, that the journalists award is more appropriate, but did not explain why. I think it is not appropriate in that it provides for less flexibility for members and I think $439.60 per week is a reasonable base for someone who comes into somebody's office in a very junior position.

Mr Berry: What classification is that?


: Clerk grade 1, the lowest grade. It is an appropriate floor under this arrangement, I think. If you have someone in your office who is very junior, $439.60 a week is probably a reasonable basis on which to pay them. If Mr Berry does

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