Page 1530 - Week 05 - Thursday, 11 May 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Stefaniak: It is quite clear—we have had this debate on a few occasions—that it is an imputation on a member. It is splitting hairs and being highly legalistic to hide behind the fact that a company does have a separate legal entity. But the company, everyone knows in this place because it has been made quite clear, is Mrs Burke and her husband. It clearly comes back then, I would submit, Mr Speaker, to an imputation on a member.
MR SPEAKER: Well, I do not think it is. We have a long-held tradition in the parliaments in the Westminster system to respect the right of members to freedom of speech in the parliaments, and I think Mr Gentleman is entitled to discuss this issue in the context of this debate. This is a debate about a committee that is looking at industrial issues and he is entitled to raise those issues.
Mrs Burke: Actually, I would be interested to hear what he has to say, because it will be useful.
MR SPEAKER: Indeed, Mrs Burke, you would be entitled to respond in that debate.
Mrs Burke: Indeed, except that it is being shut at 25 past, I note also.
MR GENTLEMAN: I am quite disappointed that my speech has been interrupted by the opposition; it may not allow me to continue it to its end. But I will go on about that company. As I said, the company calculated that the profits from their successful cleaning business would be increased if they changed the way they contracted their cleaners. So they set about requesting all the cleaners to form their own businesses and become contractors. What exactly does this mean? This relates specifically to industrial relations and the WorkChoices legislation. Does it mean a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to become self-employed? Did the cleaners have the opportunity to be their own boss? No. It meant they had to obtain an ABN and do without their normal process.
Mrs Burke: What do you know? You don’t know anything. Sit down. You’re embarrassing yourself.
MR GENTLEMAN: Mrs Burke wants to shut down this committee—not because she does not support WorkChoices; it is not because she is afraid of what might surface about WorkChoices in the next 12 months, because she thinks it is wonderful. It is because it is all a little bit too close to home. Mrs Burke found no issue with attacking witnesses at the select committee hearings. She accused them of scaremongering. She told witnesses at the committee that the committee was a waste of time, and this was after a witness had told the committee of the serious concerns he has for his son’s safety when he hops behind the wheel of a truck.
The only time Mrs Burke silenced her attack on witnesses was when the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union representatives described the practice of forcing workers from employment to contractor status as a means of reducing employer costs at the expense of employee entitlements. This is the real reason the opposition want to shut this committee down—not for any concern for the workers of the ACT but for their own personal concerns. I have to say that I did not think those animals were communal creatures until today.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .