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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 6 Hansard (15 June) . . Page.. 1838 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

not like that, if he thinks the journalists award is the right one, he should amend this instrument, not knock it out altogether. But he does not want to do that; he wants to knock out the whole thing because he does not like the idea of individual members having the right to make these decisions with respect to their own staff.

Mr Berry: Mr Speaker, I have been Gary-ed severely.

MR SPEAKER: Just a moment, please, Mr Berry. You are going to have the right of reply anyway.

Mr Berry: He is a bloody liar.

Mr Moore: I take a point of order, Mr Speaker. Just a moment ago you asked Mr Berry to withdraw calling Mr Humphries a liar. He has just repeated it.

Mr Berry: I was talking under my breath and I am sorry they heard it. I withdraw it.

MR SPEAKER: Thank you.

MR RUGENDYKE: I seek leave to speak again, Mr Speaker.

Leave granted.

MR RUGENDYKE: I think it is quite clear that some of us are not sure of the ramifications of what is happening here today, but I might be able to clear up one small aspect, that is, whether we are in dispute. I do not know and Mr Kaine does not know. The Labor Party knows, because a staffer of the Leader of the Opposition has received a letter from the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance, which is, I presume, their union, the final paragraph of which says:

Whether we are in dispute or not now, we will be tomorrow by the look of it, so that is probably the appropriate place for this issue to be determined.

MR BERRY (12.03), in reply: The darkness will now lighten, Dave. Of course that is the place for it to be settled. We should not be determining these matters here, which is what the government has set out to do in relation to this matter. Do not be misled by Mr Humphries. He tries it on all the time.

Mr Humphries said that I am opposed to members negotiating with their staff. No, I am not. I do it all the time, and we all do it all the time. That was the first Gary. The second Gary was his attempt to undervalue the dispute-making process. He said that it is a paper dispute, as if it were something less than a dispute. It is a dispute, a formal dispute, lodged in the commission, on my understanding of it. A paper dispute is a dispute in the commission. He tried to undervalue the proceedings in the commission. Then they tried to ridicule the form of application, which was a traditional form of application with ambit claims in it.

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